CORRIGENDUM

Please note that at page 138 paragraph 34 the figure of £1.5 million should read £7.5 million.

Thursday 20 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:
Mr D Flanagan ) Council for Catholic
Mr E McArdle ) Maintained Schools

1

The Chairperson: Good morning and welcome to the Education Committee. We are considering the local management of schools (LMS) funding formula. We look forward to what you have to say, and we would like to have an opportunity for questions afterwards.

2

Mr Flanagan: We thank the Committee for inviting us to attend this morning. We congratulate the Committee on its interest in LMS and for its request to the Minister to extend the consultation period. We have found that extremely helpful. Thank you for your inclusive approach to LMS; it is one of the most important issues in education, as it affects every school. We welcome the approach you have taken.

3

Our delegation includes representatives from the Governing Bodies' Association (GBA) and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). During the course of the consultation, CCMS, GBA and the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE) met to look at a range of issues on which there was agreement. Arising from that meeting we met with the Committee Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson. We also had a meeting with the Minister and Department of Education officials. I hope that those discussions were helpful to you in asking for an extension to the consultation period and in formulating your thinking on the issue.

4

NICIE was with us in those delegations. However, Michael Wardlow is not with us today because he does not want to forfeit his organisation's right to a separate hearing with the Committee, and we respect that. NICIE will attend at a future stage in the discussions.

5

We are representing the voluntary/maintained sector. Collectively, we represent approximately 64% of children educated in Northern Ireland schools. We represent the majority of schools and the majority of teachers who teach in those schools. We have sought to address our response today from the strategic and regional perspective, reflecting a culture of empowerment and delegation, rather than of administration and control. Those key factors draw us together as a body.

6

There are five issues that we would like to discuss - teachers' salaries, the TSN factor, pupil ratings, the premises, grounds and sports factors and the equality issue. We welcome the opportunity to discuss those issues with the Committee after the presentation.

7

Mr Miskelly: I speak from a voluntary grammar school perspective. The local management of schools has been a feature of that sector - in some cases for hundreds of years - and therefore when LMS was introduced in 1989, it was not a new concept. We were used to handling teachers' salaries.

8

We believe that the whole concept of LMS should be maintained and extended. The document contains a proposal - which has been supported by some people - that responsibility for teachers' salaries should be transferred to the education and library boards. That, in effect, would destroy LMS.

9

The document states that around £700 million is allocated to the aggregated schools budget (ASB). It you take salaries out of the schools' budgets, then only £100 million is left. The benefits derived from delegation to schools have been endorsed by school principals and by research published in 1997 by the University of Ulster. As you will know from the document, some schools had problems in coming to terms with the new arrangements, but, by and large, they were regarded as being beneficial.

10

Ultimately, those new arrangements were not only of benefit in the running of the school, but were also beneficial for the children, as boards of governors were able to determine the staffing needs for their own schools. It is essential that responsibility for the employment and payment of teachers - particularly in the voluntary grammar school sector - remain with boards of governors.

11

Mr Flanagan: Historically, the Department of Education has determined teacher complements throughout all schools. That was worked out on the basis of a crass statistical equation. For example, for 52 pupils, two teachers would be allocated, while for 53 pupils, three teachers would be allocated. The figures varied from one year to the next and there was no proper assessment. Some £600 million was held at the centre - that was the maximum amount of money allocated for teachers.

12

The net effect of that could be seen in the picture that developed during the year. The Department of Education found that it had huge amounts of money at the centre, and it then began to release it as a windfall. That resulted in a crazy situation, with education and library board officers informing schools of the equipment and furniture that they believed the schools needed. It was not the best way to manage the funding relating to teachers' salaries.

13

The introduction of LMS, as part of the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989, caused some concern. Principals were worried that it would lead to additional work and increased pupil:teacher ratios, resulting in fewer teachers. They were also concerned about a range of industrial relations problems. There was a sense of fear and trepidation, as teachers were unsure how the new system would work.

14

Now, 12 years later, it is useful to reflect on those early experiences. There is still a problem with additional work, but it is much less of a problem than it once was. Most of the additional workload is associated with the bureaucracy surrounding the other reforms of the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 - such as open enrolment, the curriculum and so on - and not with LMS. Pupil:teacher ratios have been substantially reduced since 1989. More teachers than ever before are now employed, in all school sectors, throughout the Province. There is much greater flexibility in staffing structures within, and between, schools. We now have a more generic curriculum-led staffing approach, and teachers are appointed on the basis of the children's needs, not simply on a numbers basis. A tremendous amount of initiative and creativity has been shown by boards of governors and school principals. There is a sense now that LMS was perhaps the single most successful reform to have been introduced under the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.

15

To remove teachers' salaries from the LMS equation would be the death knell of LMS. That would remove initiative, ownership and empowerment from boards of governors at local level. For example, two years ago we were dealing with a large urban school that had a lot of problems and a very stagnant staff. The curriculum offered was not always tailored to the needs of the children. We did substantial work in that school, and nine teachers were declared redundant because some staff were doing jobs that were no longer required. However, following that, we were able to appoint 12 additional teachers. In a very basic way, that indicates the level of flexibility and creativity that was involved. It also provided the board of governors with a carrot for the work that it was doing. Under the previous system, the board would have received nine teachers to replace the nine who were made redundant. That is the CCMS experience of how the teachers' salary element works.

16

Mr McArdle: The council is concerned about whether the quantum of funding available for TSN is appropriate. It is interesting that the command paper 'Employment Equality: Building for the Future' (Cm 3684) raised that issue. In its response on New TSN, the Northern Ireland Economic Council raised questions about whether the quantum of funding is sufficient. Some research needs to be done on that issue.

17

Our second concern is whether the multilayered impact of deprivation is properly recognised. We suggest that the Department's document does not adequately recognise that. There is clear evidence from research to show that a child from a deprived home will bring a particular difficulty - a cultural deficit. If that child goes to a school where there are considerable numbers of similar children with cultural deficits, the problem multiplies. Dr Peter Daly and Dr Ian Shuttleworth did some research for the Northern Ireland Economic Council, and work has also been done by Raudenbusch and others. Increasingly, the evidence shows that there is a neighbourhood effect - if you attend a school with high levels of deprivation in a deprived area, there will be a "dragchain" effect. That has not been recognised, and the research has been set aside too readily. In 1991, Raudenbusch said that the effect of neighbourhood deprivation is additional to the effects of individual and family background influences, and that, when translated into employment prospects, it may be of real significance in determining the future life chances of young people.

18

Sir George Quigley came to speak to CCMS about work that had been undertaken in a series of reports on school improvement and performance. Committee members will probably know of those reports. The area at the top of the Shankill, which is possibly the most deprived area in Northern Ireland, was studied. Mount Gilbert Community College has very high levels of deprivation and is set in an intensely deprived area. We do not believe that the straight-line-graph approach recognises such deprivation. It is interesting that the principle of a contextual element was accepted by everyone on the Department's subgroup. However, you will not be surprised to know that we could not agree on what the weightings should be. The principle is accepted, but no research is done on that area. The Group 1 initiative is clear evidence of the recognition of that factor and its impact. Group 1 schools are all characterised by the factors that I have spoken of.

19

We are also concerned about Key Stage 2 results being used as a mechanism for deciding certain funding. Key Stage 2 was designed for an entirely different purpose - it is a teacher-led process with periodic quality assurance. However, Mr Tom Shaw's parting inspection report gives us greater cause for concern. He said that English and Maths assessment is satisfactory and good in 60% and 55% of schools respectively. That means, conversely, that there is cause for concern in 40% and 45% of schools respectively.

20

We do not have a difficulty with the concept, but perhaps there is a problem with the mechanism that is being used.

21

We have no difficulty with schools being made accountable for TSN funding. However, we think that accountability should be extended to all TSN funding that is held at the centre, by the boards or by any other body.

22

Mr McCallion: I am here to talk about the premises factor. Possibly we should not be discussing that aspect at all, but we are concerned about low funding and about the overall amount of money in the system. We get the impression that money is being moved from one sector to another but that no new money is coming in. We must look at each of the pieces and try to see what funding is being suggested for them, and what effect it will have.

23

I will deal mainly with proposals 9.3 and 13.3. Proposal 9.3 suggests that there should be a premises factor, which should be tied to a fixed amount of money per square metre and be based on unweighted pupil costs. That suggests that a primary one child in a huge primary school with only thirty children causes as much wear and tear to the building as a 16-year-old boy in an urban school that is full of pupils. That is what unweighted means - that there is no difference in the damage or general wear and tear caused by different types of pupils.

24

People take the view that some schools have little wear and tear, and some schools have huge amounts of wear and tear. The present situation in Northern Ireland is that all schools have wear and tear. It is caused by pupils, the age of the buildings and the condition of the buildings. Yesterday I was in Portstewart, and I admired the beautiful grammar school there, which is being repainted. I suggest that the paint job on that school - Dominican College - must cost a fortune. The school sits on top of O'Hara's castle only 10 yards away from the sea. The winds blow in from the sea and the only thing between the school and the Atlantic Ocean is a bit of Malin Head. Dominican College must have maintenance conditions different to those of every other school in Northern Ireland. However, the proposal suggests that its premises factor is identical to that of a tiny primary school in the warmest part of Northern Ireland.

25

I also want to consider proposal 13.3. It says that the board formula will be used and that it will also be used for sports grounds. One thing that people can say about Belfast Education and Library Board - I use Belfast as an example, because my school is in that board, but the same would apply to any other board - is that we have never put a huge amount of money into school maintenance. Traditionally, we have done a really bad job on maintenance. We pursued many issues, but the premises factor was not one of them. The major issue now is determining how to get an average - what is the average and is it adequate?

26

I have been a principal of a maintained school. The grass gets cut 10 or 13 times per year. That will be done when the contractor wants to do it - usually after two days of torrential rain, when you could plant rice in the playing fields. The contractor then wonders why the principal looks at him as if to say "Do you expect me to sign this off, when there is more mud than grass?"

27

The Chairperson: I thought I was a cynic, Mr McCallion.

28

Mr McCallion: When you deal with premises costs, you become absolutely cynical. There are huge problems. The formula is based on the handbook. The handbook was fine when it was written in 1970. Where are we today? What does it say in the handbook about the maintenance of technology suites, science labs, home economics rooms or physical education facilities? Those things have changed significantly over time. Corrections have been made, but there has been no root and branch overhaul.

29

I suppose that people will say that looking at the premises is difficult. However, we have an estates survey in progress. My understanding is that the estates survey is almost at an end. Jimmie Cousins has been seconded to the Belfast Board to complete an estates management database. We will therefore have a detailed survey of all the controlled and maintained schools in Northern Ireland within the next year. However, the assumption is currently being made that they are all the same. If that is the case, why did we need an estates survey? Why did we spend all that money? It was because we felt that there was a difference between the buildings; a difference in age; a difference between urban and rural schools; and a difference between a school situated at O'Hara's castle in Portstewart and a school in the nicest part of Northern Ireland. There is an issue there. The formula appears to be simple, and a simple formula is difficult for people to deal with in Northern Ireland.

30

Mr Miskelly: I want to add to that. On several occasions when departmental officials have talked about a price per square metre, I have pointed out to them that the Government themselves do not pay the same rent for every property that they use throughout Northern Ireland. It is totally illogical to say that every school should have the same amount.

31

Mr Flanagan: Mr McCallion definitely gets to the right places. Pupil weightings have the potential to be the most divisive dimension of the LMS formula. The weightings attempt to set face against face. We should be aware, and recognise the sensitivity, of that. We do not want a full-scale battle between primary and secondary school teachers, each saying that they are worse off. That is divisive and a sensitive issue.

32

We, as a delegation, recognise the significance of early-years learning. We recognise the need for additional finance for early-years learning and that prevention is better than cure. We equally recognise that a child who does not learn to read by the time he or she leaves Key Stage 1 may never learn to read. If such a person eventually does, it will be at huge expense and will require much effort throughout the school system and perhaps beyond that into adult learning. That case is not lost on us. More money does need be targeted towards the primary sector.

33

However, we are going to suggest an alternative way of doing that. The formula proposes that it should be transferred from secondary into primary; that would be a fatal mistake and would set sector against sector. There is a much more inclusive and creative way of doing it.

34

We already have the "Good Start" initiative whereby all primary one pupils have a classroom assistant. If we extended that initiative through a central initiative driven by the policy-makers, it would cost £1·5 million per year over six years. It would mean that all teachers at primary level would have a classroom assistant. The initiative would manifest itself in relation to each teacher and school and would clearly have benefits for the learning opportunities of young children. We have a precedent for that initiative.

35

Similarly, we have seen the introduction of the "class size" initiative, whereby no child in Key Stage 1 should be taught in a class of more than 30 pupils. There are two options. We could either extend that initiative to Key Stage 2, or we could backtrack and say that, as 30 pupils at Key Stage 1 worked well and there have been real benefits from it, we would reduce the class size to 28. That would cost approximately £3 million per year, and, again, it would be driven by the policy-makers.

36

There could also be a "books and equipment" initiative, whereby resources would be targeted for specific purposes in the primary sector. That would cost about £1 million per year. Finally, we have already spoken about the condition of premises. We are educating children in the most drab of conditions. If we see a school pre-summer and then see it post-summer after it has been repainted, the difference that the maintenance makes to the learning environment is unbelievable. We have a responsibility to ensure that children are being educated in the best of environments. Major advantages will accrue. The great advantage is that such initiatives would be driven by the policy-makers and not implemented by the administrators. That would allow schools at local level to take action on their own behalf.

37

Mr Miskelly: The GBA deplored the fact that the Department failed to provide schools with detailed statements setting out the impact. We are grateful to the Committee for obtaining an answer for us on the value of a unit. We have applied that in many of our schools, and we are seeing very substantial losses.

38

We know that the Minister said that it is inevitable that there will be winners and losers. I do not see the inevitability of that. It seems nonsense to move a problem from one area to another. In Northern Ireland we should remember - and we keep reminding ourselves - that education is about children and providing the best education for children.

39

Northern Ireland has a reputation for having a better education system than that in other parts of the United Kingdom. In voluntary grammar schools particularly, we pride ourselves in the value added. The value added in many schools - not just voluntary schools - has been by the goodwill and voluntary work of teachers. It would be a shame if anything in the proposals would deter staff or prevent boards of governors from supporting the value added through extra-curricular activities.

40

The GBA does not accept that a new school which cost £10 million or £15 million to build should receive the same amount of maintenance money for premises and grounds in its first five years as older school buildings.

41

The Department of Education carried out equality testing on which it said it provided data. However, I do not understand how that data can be trusted because it contained errors that have since been amended. Therefore some people have lost confidence in the data. All schools should be given the opportunity to see the figures. That would be a proper impact assessment.

42

A few years ago the Government reduced the grants for preparatory departments from 50% to 40% and then from 40% to 30%. Preparatory departments are now receiving somewhere in the region of £400 to £500 per pupil. The GBA supports diversity of schools and the choice of the individual, so it is not opposed to the development of the integrated sector and the Irish-medium sector. However, it does not seem right that some schools in other sectors are receiving £2,000 or £2,500 per pupil when the preparatory departments in voluntary grammar schools only receive £400 to £500. When that was debated some years ago, the Department said that there were plenty of spaces in the primary sector for such pupils. However, the cost to the public purse becomes greater if the child is educated anywhere other than in a preparatory department.

43

The Chairperson: I do not mean to be aggressive or unpleasant. Anyone who knows me knows that I am not like that. [Laughter] I say that for the benefit of Hansard. Could it be said that your criticisms - particularly in relation to the payment of salaries - were an attempt to knife the education boards and to remove a major part of their responsibilities? If LMS were to be extended in the way that you are advocating, the role of the boards would be reduced.

44

Mr Miskelly: The GBA is sensitive to the position of the boards. The group has met with the Minister. We did not mention it, but if, as proposed, there is to be a common formula for all of Northern Ireland then, logically, there is no need for five groups to distribute the money. There should be a funding agency. We suggested to the Minister that that could be done by a separate agency - which GBA prefers - or on a lead-board basis, as applied with the computerised local administration system for schools (CLASS) initiative. A report was made on architectural services, but it was shelved. Those involved in that report - who included representatives from the boards - agreed that there should be a centralised architectural service for Northern Ireland.

45

We do not want to give the impression that we are trying to destroy the boards, but administration in Northern Ireland - all administration - needs to be examined. It is over-weighted for the population of Northern Ireland, and people have been saying this for years. I think it was Tony Worthington, who, unfortunately, was not prepared to grasp that nettle. We understand the political pressures, but there does seem to be tremendous duplication. The boards have not really had to handle the teachers' salaries issue since 1989, and I do not see why one would give responsibility back to them unless they wanted to take this under their wing - perhaps to simply extend their present responsibilities.

46

Mr Flanagan: In a sense that is really a secondary issue. The primary issue is the notion of autonomy and empowerment, as opposed to control and administration. The voluntary grammar sector, with its long history of being empowered, and all other sectors, since being empowered in 1989, have clearly demonstrated that the exercise of control over the determination of teachers' salaries has worked. It has worked not only in the interests of schools, but in the interests of standards and in the interests of the children. There is clear evidence of that in the sector that I represent. The greater numbers of teachers in schools has raised standards, and it has allowed people to exercise local initiative.

47

The argument is not about administration. It is about whether we want to empower people at local level and recognise that they are there to do the job, or whether we want to simply operate a formulaic approach which did not produce the desired results before 1989. It would be a backward step if we were to remove teachers' salaries. We should be looking to step forward. Whether or not there is additional delegation from boards is not the issue. We should ensure that we retain the central element of LMS.

48

Mr S Wilson: On the last point, I tend to agree with the argument that has been made. However, the Chairman and I have met with principals of schools and people from boards of governors on a number of occasions, and opinion seems to be divided on the issue. Many principals and boards of governors see the control of salaries as a poisoned chalice. I do not have any scientific evidence for it, but there appears to be a big division of opinion between the people who actually have to administer at local level and those in central organisations such as yourselves. I would be interested in your comment on that.

49

You mentioned that the use of Key Stage 2 is not appropriate, or that there are difficulties in using it, for assessing special educational needs. Have you any suggestions as to what measure might then be used for allocating moneys for special educational needs if you do not use Key Stage 2?

50

I notice a difference of opinion between the two organisations on the question of TSN - perhaps I am wrong. I get the impression that CCMS is saying that there should be more for TSN but that the GBA is saying that it needs to have explanations as to why extra money is being given in the first place. Can you clear that up?

51

Mr Flanagan: On your final point, we are two very different organisations and have different nuances in all of this. However, we are here with a common purpose. We do not agree explicitly on everything about LMS, but there is a fair measure of agreement.

52

You are right that there is a divergence of thinking among principals. There is a very persuasive argument that if someone were to take the staff workload off your hands you would have a much easier job - allowing you to manage on a day-to-day basis. However, real management is about making hard decisions, trying to raise standards and dealing with the needs of children. In 1989 there was tremendous fear and trepidation among principals and boards of governors about the responsibilities, but since then they have clearly demonstrated that they can handle matters, and with good effect.

53

The very persuasive argument that somebody could take all that work away and thus let schools get on with the daily business of educating children has been put to principals. We need to read behind the lobbying. Are we in the business of control or of empowerment? We must decide.

54

Mr McArdle: I take the point in relation to Key Stage 2. Interestingly, we asked some of our principals who were doing standardised testing processes to do a read across from the Key Stage 2 results from schools. They could find no correlation.

55

At a meeting with many of our secondary principals yesterday we discussed the issue of Key Stage 3 and how, for example, one might predict for GCSE. Their concern was that they were all over the place in relation to performance at Key Stage 3 and outcome at Key Stage 4.

56

There is a difficulty. We raised that issue at a consultative meeting, organised by the Department of Education, at which a range of academics from England was present. The comment was made that it called the assessment processes and arrangements into question. We said "What if it does? Perhaps we need to do that."

57

There has been a variety of approaches across the water. For example, in Kent a child is designated as having special needs and there is a moderation process. Others have specific defined testing regimes. Our difficulty was with the prospect of Key Stage 2 being allied to the 11-plus testing - we did not want to be adding another pressure. In the group, there was an acceptance that this may be the best fit. CCMS has difficulty in deciding whether "the best fit" is the best way forward. There is a very positive correlation between social deprivation and underachievement. The Department's statistical bulletins 96/1 and 96/2 recognised that. Perhaps we need to continue to use social deprivation as a factor in giving out all the money at this stage, but research to find another mechanism should at least be begun. If that means addressing the Key Stage 2 issue then that is what we should do. We should not just say that it is all very difficult; we should say that something should be done.

58

We called for research on that, as we did, for example, in 1994 on the ratios between primary and post-primary weightings. We did it again in 1997. There needs to be an evidential base for what we are doing.

59

Kent is now moving away from what it did in the past. I do not have a solution for you and I apologise for that.

60

Mr McCallion: On TSN, I do not think that there is a disagreement between us; we are agreed on it. Why was 5% to 5·5% chosen? That is our problem. Some people say that it should be 6%, some say that it should be 7%, while others say it should be 4%. The answer is that we do not know. Five per cent was brought in initially in an attempt to look at the problem. It was an attempt to offer some evidence as to the long-term effect of putting money into TSN. Our difficulty now is that the document just says "go from 5% to 5·5%". Why? That is our concern and it applies to a lot of things in the document. Why this step? Why not another? It is perhaps to do with the fact that Northern Ireland was administered by people who came over here on a plane now and then. People told them what to do and the Ministers stood up and said it. The difference between that and our own Government in Northern Ireland must be that we ask " Is this the best thing? Why are we doing it? What is the advantage to our children and our school system?" That is our only concern about TSN. I do not see that there is any evidence being offered to us.

61

On LMS, I agree with Mr Wilson's argument that there is disagreement among people. I have been at meetings where people have said that it would be great if someone would take the workload away. I was involved in the Belfast Education and Library Board's review of LMS. We met at the Ulidia Teachers' Centre. Principals from nursery, primary, secondary, and grammar schools were there, and they were asked what they thought about LMS. It came over strongly that they did not want to do away with LMS.

62

I was confident that teachers in the nursery sector would argue against it because 90% of their budget is tied in to TSN and teachers' salaries. A small movement in the number of pupils would have a major effect on the funding for nursery schools. Those teachers were very clear that, under no circumstances, would they go back to the previous system. The argument was that a fixed amount of money is available for distribution. Some schools get large sums of money and some schools get tiny sums of money. No one wants that power to go to the board. People want the money for good educational reasons.

63

A tremendous advantage of having a common formula agency is that the boards will have to explain why they want the money. The boards currently explain it to the civil servants in the Department. One set of civil servants looks to another set of civil servants, and they use the assessment of relative needs exercise (ARNE) formula to decide on the amount of money. Each education and library board then has to try to get as much extra money as is possible.

64

The boards should be asked why they want the money, what they propose to do with it, and the benefits for people in Northern Ireland. If there is a magnificent Curriculum Advisory and Support Service (CASS) in Derry, why is it not available in Belfast? If a good school development plan is produced in the Southern Board, why can a school in the North-Eastern Board not use it? It is seen as being a foreign board - it might as well be in a foreign country. There is no transfer across because it is "the board's money". I used to get into trouble with the South Eastern Education and Library Board because I cynically said that it was my money. The board was quite indignant about that, because I was only the school principal and it obviously was not my money.

65

Mr Miskelly: To pick up on Mr McArdle's point about research on TSN, there has never been any research on the real cost of educating a pupil at each year or key educational stage up to age 18. Such research is needed to establish the real cost.

66

Mr Gibson: I know exactly what Mr McCallion meant about signing for the grass cutting. I was once accused on trying to walk on water. I was once responsible for a report in relation to social need issues and the long tail of underachievement that exists. All the agencies were to come together to try to have the issue solved for children before they reached seven years of age. That was thought a simplistic idea at that time. However, there was no empirical evidence to guide us. Is that still the situation?

67

Mr Flanagan: Mr McCallion said that there is a clear lack of evidence. Mr McArdle said that we asked for the research to be done. We asked for it in 1994 and 1996. We are now asking you about it; the Committee is best placed to ask for that research to be commissioned. The Committee's voice may be heard where other voices were previously ignored.

68

There is a compelling argument as we move forward because we do not want to be here in 10 years' time asking the same questions. It is important that the Education Committee identify areas where empirical evidence is needed. That should then be passed to the Department of Education or other researchers in the field so that the clarity that we need, which is not currently there, can become available.

69

Mr McArdle: There is clear evidence that a difference can be made if the issue of social deprivation at a young age is addressed head on. Pam Sammons of the London Institute of Education carried out a longitudinal study that found a positive correlation - children who began to fail at age six were still failing at age 16. There is little doubt that we should be talking about innovation at the start rather than remediation at the end.

70

Several factors contribute to the problem. First, I am not convinced that our teachers are being taught sufficient skills for diagnostic and remedial teaching. That is not a criticism of the teaching profession. The amount of curricular time available to the Higher Education Institutions to cover these matters has been squeezed.

71

For example, the Belfast Action Team - those of us who are old enough remember it fondly - operated a major literacy and numeracy scheme. When the University of Ulster evaluated the scheme, the teachers stood up and unashamedly said that they were committed and professional, but they did not have many of the necessary skills. That issue has emerged in a whole series of Department inspectorate reports. However, there does not seem to be any commitment to deal with it.

72

There needs to be an understanding of the TSN dimension early on. There needs to be a multidisciplinary approach - and New TSN is beginning to do that. The local Assembly is beginning to force the Department into a multifaceted approach to multilayered deprivation. Much work and a lot more research must be done. As Donal Flanagan said, it would be a shame if we were saying the same thing in 10 years' time.

73

Mr Flanagan: Children who fail at six and 16 - children whom the system has failed - do not access the lifelong learning initiative that was meant to provide for them.

74

Mr Gibson: This raises the whole question of the use of TSN at the moment. Should we redirect funding?

75

Mr Flanagan: You need a base for that.

76

Mr McArdle: That brings us back to the issue that the council raised, back in 1994, when we were responding to the strategic analysis that was done then. We certainly need TSN moneys to facilitate and deliver remediation programmes at post-primary level. The question is whether we can have a structured realignment of funding. However, in the interim it would have to be done through new funding.

77

Other issues are whether the TSN initiatives have been sufficiently co-ordinated and whether we have begun to look at what could multiply the TSN impact, namely the skilling of teachers in particular areas and a multifaceted, communities and schools approach.

78

I am not sure that we do not need New TSN, but we do need reinvigoration, and we need to reconsider whether TSN is being used to the greatest effect.

79

Mr Gibson: It should be used to provide the skills rather than remedial work that may not be effective.

80

Mr McCallion: The school inspectors have begun only recently to ask what schools are using the TSN money for. That is a perfectly reasonable question. Some schools are getting quite large amounts of money, and it is proper to ask what they use it for. The use of that money will then be a matter for professional argument. However, the question must be asked, otherwise the implication is that it is just a lump of money from Santa Claus; and that is not particularly useful.

81

Mr K Robinson: There are always sub-plots in education. I start from that basis. Far be it from me to suggest that CCMS, for instance, would be involved in a sub-plot, but you talk about a situation in a school where old, tired staff - who perhaps had been through many battles - are replaced by young, enthusiastic and differently-skilled staff. That struck me as a management tool - not necessarily for the school, but perhaps for the body above the school. In this case, it would be CCMS, but it could equally have been a board or the GBA.

82

Let us suppose that I am a school governor. The school is in a TSN area, and it does not even have its basic staffing level. Every year the school clocks up a deficit, and every year we have to take a hard management decision and say to the principal "We are sorry; we know that you have a difficult task, but we will have to remove a teacher to save money." Despite the fact that early-years learning and all the other initiatives are in the background, the children will go into a primary one class, and they will then go to a primary two/three class. That will be followed by a primary three/four class and so on - there will be composite classes all the way through the school. How will LMS - no matter how we juggle with it - take us away from the situation where a principal and a board of governors are trying to tackle a difficult, multifaceted problem? They cannot get onto ground zero, so to speak, because they cannot achieve the basic staffing levels that they need to do the simple part of the job, never mind the difficult part. How do all those machinations translate in practice?

83

Mr Flanagan: I assure you that CCMS would not be involved in any plots against anyone. Nevertheless, LMS and the delegation of budgets have brought about a degree of flexibility for some schools, and we want to see that extended.

84

In the last few years, the Department of Education has introduced the Group 1 initiative, which has created additional flexibility for some schools. Deprivation levels of 60% do not mean six times 10%; it is much more. Therefore, schools that are in difficult situations, as in the case outlined by Ken Robinson, should be allowed access to the money that is necessary to rectify matters.

85

The straight-line graph that says that 60% social deprivation is six times greater than 10% is absolute nonsense. It does not recognise the difficult environmental factors or the "dragchain" effect that children of that nature face in school. We need to look at why the Group 1 initiative was introduced and how can we reflect that in school funding.

86

Mr McArdle: Our TSN action plan commits us to explore further with the Department the extension of Group 1 into the primary sector. In the case of the school outlined, there may well be falling numbers caused by migration. We recognise that the operation of open enrolment under LMS presents increasing difficulties. There needs to be some lateral thinking about that. The Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency says that there will be a substantial decline in pupil numbers throughout Northern Ireland over the next 10 years.

87

There needs to be a rethink on TSN and on the structure and implications of open enrolment as it operates. The contextual effect also needs to be considered. It may be unpalatable to some, but academic research is clear that there is a contextual effect. Those are the only ways to break the cycle of deprivation. It is almost impossible to forward plan in relation to deprivation, so we must be reactive.

88

Mr K Robinson: The argument was put to principals in a persuasive way. Many principals, faced with the situation that I have just described, would be happy for the Department to give them their core staffing; that would at least allow them to do the core job. It is that desperate in some areas.

89

Mr Flanagan: Mr McCallion asked why people would want to retain that control at the centre. What benefits would there be to the school?

90

Mr K Robinson: It is a cry for help from the schools in that situation.

91

Mr McCallion: It is also an argument about what we, as an organisation, are involved in. Should we be telling people how to do their jobs or are we in the business of empowering principals? I have been on the board of governors of a school that was not doing well, and I have been on the board of governors when the school was perceived to have been turned around. I did not care what the CCMS view on the matter was - it was a much easier life for me.

92

Mr McHugh: There has been much discussion on TSN and New TSN. We have talked about the extra per cent and why TSN is needed, or how much is needed for it. In relation to the percentage, what figure do you think is needed to deal sufficiently with TSN? There seems to be a thread running through debates in the political field, within the various parties and, indeed, in the schools. Perhaps I am being cynical, but is everybody committed to New TSN or to TSN or indeed, to equality, at the various levels?

93

It seems as though people are trying to find ways around TSN. Could that money be used for run-of-the-mill things? We had the same argument with the equality agenda. Can you enlighten me on that?

94

Mr Flanagan: First, regarding the quantum, we do not know because there has been no research. We need to establish how the money was used and what the outcomes were. Schools receiving TSN moneys should be asked to make an annual report answering those questions. We would then be in a position to say that more could have achieved more, or less could have achieved the same result. Secondly, we need to carry out wider research on what social deprivation actually means and how it impacts on schools, not just on individual children but also on schools with large numbers of socially deprived children.

95

Mr McCallion: One difficulty with TSN funding is that it almost appears to be a gift. Why 5%? There seems to be no reason why that figure was chosen.

96

The GBA is interested in the education of all children in Northern Ireland. It would be much easier to educate our pupils if everybody else were interested in education. If the main theme among the youth population in Northern Ireland is Manchester United - or whatever - it is very difficult to get education driven through. We have a genuine, 100% interest in education in Northern Ireland. Arguments have been put to us that TSN will improve the lot of education and will raise the standard of education in Northern Ireland. That is to our advantage, as well as to that of the people of Northern Ireland.

97

We are concerned about whether TSN funding has been put to good use, but we have difficulty in finding evidence on that. CCMS has offered evidence of how good use can be made of TSN money. CCMS has applied pressure to a significant number of schools to bring about improvement. I do not know whether it was the TSN money, Mr Flanagan's nice smile or Mr McArdle's talking, but there has been an improvement in the situation from 1988 to 2001. I do not know why that happened, and I do not think that anyone knows. It suggests, however, that there is a possibility that TSN funding can be used well. My concern is that if it is used badly, schools will fail. If schools fail, we will all lose out. The difficulty is balancing good use of it, perception of good use of it and evidence of good use of it. I do not worry about the research because I think that the research will show good use.

98

Mrs E Bell: I will ask for a written response because it may be difficult to answer my question now. I was interested in what CCMS said about the administrative costs that are unique to voluntary grammar and maintained schools: "In responding to previous consultations, the Council has recognised that schools which are also employers in their own legal right, have unavoidable responsibilities which incur unavoidable addition costs".

99

I am interested in that because evidence from integrated schools suggests that they will experience many difficulties with the age-weighted pupil units (AWPUs) being reduced. Can you, in a written response, expand on section 11? Your opinions would enable us take that aspect further in our analysis. You work very closely with the schools, and you know the practical problems on the ground. We have a letter here from NICIE, but integrated schools have told me that they are concerned about what is happening.

100

Mr Flanagan: We will do that. We always like to help those unfortunate people in other sectors.

101

The Chairperson: I have some final questions, and I appreciate that it is unfair to ask for a "yes" or "no" answer to them.

102

Are these proposals, as currently constituted, likely to create a schools system that assists the boards, the principals and the teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs? Are they likely to create a fair and transparent system which is simple to operate and easy to understand?

103

Mr Flanagan: Sorry, which proposals are we talking about, Chairman?

104

The Chairperson: The proposals on LMS funding - the entire document.

105

Mr Miskelly: Before colleagues answer that, we want you to know - and we have written to the Minister on this - that the GBA recognises that a review of school funding within the education service is necessary. However, it seems illogical to proceed to implement a new system, given the imminent publication of the report by Gerry Burns on post-primary education, the deferment of the curriculum proposals, and the overall review of administration in the public service in Northern Ireland.

106

Mr Flanagan: If there were a diminution in the empowerment of schools at local level, we would see a decline in standards. There is no doubt about that. In our response, we have highlighted the need for greater transparency and openness. If money is being held at the centre, we want to know why and we want to know what it is being used for. If schools' money has been clawed back through job vacancies, or for other reasons, then that money should be returned to schools. It should not be used to prop up central administration. Fairness and openness are required.

107

Mr McCallion: The local education authorities in England take pride in the percentage of money that they hand out to the equivalent of our controlled and maintained schools. In England, Wales and Scotland the figures are 90%, 95%, and 97% respectively. The Belfast Board does best here; it takes pride in its 80%.

108

Mr Miskelly: On the impact on children, the Department claims that some 88% of schools will gain. That, however, means that some 12% will lose. That 12% could represent 150 to 160 schools. The loss is not quantified, but, based on the figures that we have for some voluntary grammar schools, we are talking about £200,000. If a school loses £200,000, inevitably that will mean fewer staff.

109

The Chairperson: Thank you very much, Gentlemen, for your attendance this morning.

Thursday 20 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Fee
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:
Ms A Andrews )
Mr M Crudden )
Mrs D Ferguson ) Primary Principals
Ms J Houston )
Mr M Lombard )

110

The Chairperson: Good morning. The schools that you represent vary from each other and suffer different levels of social deprivation. We wish to get a flavour of what it is like for you as practitioners managing a local management of schools (LMS) scenario budget. We intend to first allow each of you the opportunity to give a presentation.

111

Mr K Robinson: How was this group selected?

112

The Committee Clerk: We sought the views of certain types of schools.

113

Mr Lombard: I come from Holy Trinity Primary School in West Belfast. Due to decreasing numbers, the boys' and girls' schools amalgamated last year, and the new school is large enough for 1,600 pupils. Social deprivation accounts for 65% of the pupils, and pupils from the travelling population account for 35%.

114

LMS was not selected by teachers but was a result of the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989, which was somewhat imposed on school principals. Most principals at that time were managing the curriculum and everything else was devolved to the boards. It came as quite a shock to those of us who had to take on board managing salaries, and so on. Nevertheless, we have now become accustomed to the LMS system, and one favourable aspect of it is the independence when deciding on the number of teachers in a school.

115

LMS is said to give tremendous freedom to exercise judgement according to local needs. However, approximately 90% of the budget is spent on salaries and utilities, so there is little room for discretion to embark on local initiatives. Nevertheless, we have grown accustomed to LMS over the past 11 or 12 years, and it is highly favoured by schools.

116

With regard to the common formula, 65% of schools throughout Northern Ireland are small and serve 25% of the total school population, while 35% serve 75% of the pupils. The small schools lobby exercises a power and control that far exceeds it. A greater rationalisation should take place of the smaller schools.

117

There is a need to keep the free school meals ratio, which is a good indicator of targeting social need. I am aware that schools in more leafy areas are concerned that they do not benefit in any way from that. Perhaps a way around that would be to divide the budget so that there is an acknowledgement of their social needs. The interpretation of social need is at the moment probably confined to poverty and the lack of material goods, but it can also be interpreted in other ways. I am sensitive to the needs of schools in areas of higher employment, and so on.

118

The nursery age-weighted pupil units (AWPU) should be exactly the same. In east Belfast, where I was for 11 years, two nursery units were attached. We had the same number of pupils as most independent nurseries. It was unfair that the AWPUs for nurseries in independent nursery schools with their own principals were different to those for nursery schools with units attached. We felt that the primary school was subsidising the nursery school children.

119

I am also aware that the school benefits from the special needs budget; we have a considerable number of pupils who qualify in that area. I am also sensitive to the fact that it is at present aligned to 11-plus results. The proposal is that the special needs budget will be tied to Key Stage 2 results. I am not sure that that is very sensible. I have reservations - and I do not mind saying this publicly - about the internal validity and reliability of the Key Stage exams and about whether they achieve their purpose. Also, a punitive element is involved: as a school tries to do better for the children, its special needs allowance goes down.

120

Special needs are relative. Even children from "better backgrounds" have special needs. A way around the problem might be to divide the budget so that some of it is reserved for high concentrations of children with special needs. The Warnock formula perhaps should be applied to all schools. There is a high correlation between social deprivation and special needs, for example, in east Belfast, west Belfast and the upper Shankill. It is a common problem, and it is a mistake to presume that any area is free from it. There are schools where, for perhaps geographical or social reasons, it is difficult to raise the children's IQ level.

121

Mrs Ferguson: I am the principal of a rural primary school in County Antrim with an enrolment of 134 pupils. We are in a building that is 93 years old. There are two classrooms and four mobile classrooms. We have been promised a fifth mobile classroom when money becomes available. We are very stretched in regard to accommodation.

122

Many of our pupils are from farming families with no great academic tradition. However, the families are very supportive of the school and of what we are trying to achieve. We have no free school meals, which is surprising considering the problems farmers have experienced in recent years.

123

It is extremely difficult to manage our budget under the current system, and I welcome the proposals before us for more money to be allocated to the primary sector. However, I am most concerned about the amount being diverted, for I do not think it sufficient to meet the needs of smaller primary schools.

124

The document has recognised the historical underinvestment in primary education. A primary-school pupil currently attracts only 65% of the funding attracted by those in post-primary schools. However, primary schools are given the task of providing a broad and balanced curriculum similar to that of the secondary schools.

125

In the primary school we deal with a whole range of abilities, while at the age of 11 pupils are streamed into grammar or secondary according to ability. We do not select those who attend our school; we must attempt to cater from the least able to the most gifted children, and it is therefore essential that our class sizes are small enough to allow teachers to do so.

126

To a large extent the attitude a child adopts to learning at primary school dictates its attitude to education for the rest of its life. If a child fails at primary, the gap often widens as it gets older. We must therefore tackle the problem earlier, which brings me to the next issue of targeting social need.

127

I am content that currently 68% of total funding for targeting social need is spent on social deprivation. Thirty-two per cent comes under the heading of special needs. The money that primary schools get for special needs does not even begin to address the problem. Ultimately teachers spend 20 minutes of their lunch hour about twice a week with as many children as they can fit in. That is the case in our primary school. It is not dealing with special needs. We have a reading recovery programme, but we had to get extra money to implement it.

128

Children are experiencing failure, and it is compounded by the fact that we have neither the time nor the money to address their needs adequately. We need a specialist teacher, but we do not have the funds. Our provision for special educational needs should be in line with the demands of the code of practice. Our having no free school meals means we cannot get any extra money; yet we have a high instance of special needs. Instead of having the allocation linked to the uptake of free school meals, I feel the money should be allocated on a scale which rises according to the number of pupils at each stage in the code of practice. That would be a much fairer way of distributing the money.

129

Finally, let me apply the new arrangements you propose to my own school. With the figures for the new system of funding, it appears I might be about £10,000 better off if there were a high aggregated school budget ("high ASB"), falling to about £6,000 with a "low ASB". Neither of these figures would be adequate to address our problems. I have worked out that we ideally need about £30,000 more in the budget to deliver the curriculum to which our children are entitled.

130

In our school we work very much as a team; we know the money is not there, and everyone makes sacrifices to provide children with the best education they can. As principal I am not paid according to what is recommended by our boards. We have no vice-principal, since that would take £2,000-£3,000 which we need for special needs and other areas. There is only one post - which was awarded 13 years ago - and teachers have said that they need the money in the classroom, meaning they do without. We bid for new initiatives every time we see a chance of extra money. Ultimately our staff have made commitments and sacrifices to get as much money as possible into the classroom, since we know there is not enough. However, not every school would be able to make that commitment.

131

Ms Houston: I am principal of the first planned integrated primary school in Northern Ireland, and I welcome the Committee's attempt to be more transparent in funding matters and as fair as possible to all sectors. As you know, schools are not constituted or managed in the same way.

132

I talk from experience because I worked in a controlled school for 10 years before moving to the integrated sector that was independent for two years. The Belfast Board then maintained us for two years, and then, with the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989, we entered the new and unknown area of grant-maintained integrated (GMI) school. That was a way of facilitating parents to set up new integrated schools - one of the cogs in a wheel to try to encourage understanding and tolerance in our society.

133

As principal of that school, there have been many pros and cons of that status over the past years. The pros are that the board of governors has freedom to make decisions about funding in our school, and it can meet local demands to meet the aims of integration. The board can also carry money forward from budget areas, transfer it and make three-year plans that work.

134

The big carrot for us was bringing forward the new building programme, and in 1996 we got a brand new primary school. That has been wonderful because prior to that we had 300 children in a school that had asbestos radiators and no windows. The biggest management decision I used to make was where to move the bucket to catch the drips. We now walk around every day saying thanks for our wonderful school. We were already at our enrolment figure the day that the school was completed - we reached our maximum figure in one day, and we still turn a lot of pupils away. In north Belfast that situation is very advantageous, and there is certainly the need for more integrated schools.

135

The disadvantage of GMI schools is that there is a lack of understanding and awareness throughout the education system of how those schools work. Other schools perceive that we get additional funding, and they become frustrated and angry. In the integrated movement we have not been proficient at explaining the needs for the additional funding, and that is a problem. We have to pay VAT of 17·5% on much that we buy, while other schools do not. We must have annual internal and external audits under the financial memorandum. We have to run our own payrolls and the expensive BACS system, and we also must pay insurance for our buildings or public liabilities. That means that we have purchase and administration costs that are above those of other schools. Therefore, that money should come into the age-weighted pupil unit (AWPU) for our schools because we cannot operate without it.

136

Another downside is that GMI status provides no statutory support. The board of governors is the hirer and firer of all the people who work in that system. Boards of governors have high expectations that principals will be wonderful at organising the maintenance, personnel, payroll and all the National Joint Council (NJC) regulations. Endless meetings allow us to put our aims into place, and that can cause added stresses for the employees.

137

I have tried to get some evidence that shows that the integrated schools - and particularly ours - in north Belfast attract a very high number of challenging children and children with special needs. Unfortunately I do not yet have the statistical evidence to prove that, but I have a high number of children in wheelchairs, children with partial hearing and children who perhaps have been expelled from other schools for exhibiting challenging behaviour. A lot of children come to the integrated sector because of our child-centred ethos, and that has not been recognised in the system.

138

Under our current budget, this year I have had to get rid of three classroom assistants because there was insufficient funding to support them. That is an issue for me, especially if in March somebody suddenly finds extra slippage money of about £3,000 or £4,000 and tells me that I can have it. Had I been able to have it in September, when I needed it, I could have kept two of those ladies employed.

139

The new proposals are equitable across the sections. I am aware that there will be a levelling-out of the AWPUs, so there will not be any real increase in our budget. We have been fortunate in my school because we are completely full up after growing. In a developing system you employ young teachers who are lower down the salary scale, but as they start to move up the scale the amount of money available as disposable income decreases significantly. We have been growing for 16 years, and we are now like all the other schools - there is very little money to play around with. For example, I would love to have a reading recovery teacher but I cannot afford it.

140

Because I am in north Belfast, I am very concerned about the safety of my pupils: That is a huge issue for children travelling to and from school. One half of the Whitewell Road is full of tricolours and black flags and the other half is full of Union Jacks and red, white and blue kerbs. We have tried to provide a haven of tranquillity for many troubled families in the area. There has been rioting, and we have had significant vandalism done to the school from both sides - though hopefully not from our own pupils - which is a big issue. I have had to learn how to claim from the Northern Ireland Office and, without much success, try to get some compensation for roofs that have been hit by golf balls, pickaxes, et cetera. The boards do not become involved. There are many issues, and as a stand-alone school there seems to be nowhere to go for support.

141

I am delighted about the budget because I want to see a sense of fairness. My job will be easier if people perceive that we are getting a fair amount of the budget. My biggest concern is that in an attempt to do that people will not understand the amount of money that has to be spent for those additional services in the grant maintained sector. For example, my cheque to Leslie Gallagher for insurance was for £4,000 and my audit fees were £3,000, and these are all significant amounts of money. Our money is eaten up and there is no money left to play around with. Our class sizes are 30 in every room because we have to bring money in. That is too many when some of the children are disaffected and on many occasions exhibiting challenging behaviour, and we are trying to do our best for them.

142

Your dilemma is whether the constitution of all the schools should be put on an equal footing. If GMI status is to be protected, then I hope that there will be sufficient funding to meet the needs. I would be concerned that it would not be done equitably across the five area boards. I would like to see a central funding agency that would take over funding for all schools, which everybody could report to and see a sense of fairness. If everything is done fairly, people are happy; that is where I am coming from. Unfortunately that is not the case.

143

I can proudly say that when we started off in 1985 we did not believe we could have over 1,200 children in integrated education in north Belfast, which is probably the most divided part of our society. It comes down to much unbelievably hard work from individuals who have worked way beyond their call of duty to try and make integration work.

144

Mr Crudden: I will be brief because my colleagues have already said much of what I would say. I am a teaching principal in a school of 133 pupils which is experiencing falling enrolment. I inherited a deficit of £52,000, and I have five staff. I teach four days a week and on the fifth day I do all the administrative duties of a principal. There are two composite classes in the school - a primary one and two class and a primary two and three class.

145

While we have been described as a small rural primary school, the close proximity to Belfast negates that. We are in effect an extension of the city of Belfast, and we have all the problems that come from that.

146

My budget allocation for the year is £245,000, some of which is made up of additional funding for special needs, the Primary 1 initiative and some curriculum support funding. It is unfortunate that the money that I receive for special needs and the Primary 1 initiative cannot be directed to those areas because the greater need of the school has to come into play. That money is not directed to the areas where it is most needed.

147

Eighty-three per cent of my budget covers teachers' salaries; 11% covers the cost of auxiliary and ancillary staff, and 4% is for maintenance and general running costs. That leaves me, as principal, with a budget of 2% to run the school. In a ratio of money to pupils, it works out that there is approximately £45 per year for each pupil's education. The £45 has to cover everything that is needed daily in the classroom, and it is not sufficient.

148

Invariably the school is left in the position of having a budget that does not cover its running costs and, therefore, I am forced to make savings wherever possible. Unfortunately, in order to keep the deficit to a minimum, I am faced with the prospect of teacher redundancies. Redundancies will lead to more composite classes. More composite classes will lead to parents sending their children elsewhere, and that is how the cycle goes.

149

I have also had to cut the number of ancillary staff and reduce their hours. I have two secretaries who provide a total of 25 hours secretarial assistance per week. This means that there is no secretarial support for a large part of the school day and, as principal, it falls to me to do many of the secretarial tasks.

150

Maintenance is a major issue. We are fortunate that the school is only three or four years old. At present, we do not have any major maintenance concerns, but it is something that we have to keep on top of. If we do not take care of the small jobs now, they will become large jobs later.

151

In order to keep costs to a minimum I find myself putting a lot of pressure on teachers to undertake additional duties that they are not paid for. Teachers are asked to make whatever savings they can, for example, by doing without heating for a large part of the day. They are also being asked to do without resources that they could use in the classroom. The quality of education being provided by the education system in general is delivered only because of the professionalism and dedication of the teaching staff.

152

There are a few issues that I would like to talk about with regard to the proposals for a common funding. First, using free school meals as an indicator of social need is unfair at times. In my school there is a small uptake of free school meals, but the town and the general area experience a great deal of social deprivation. I get no additional funding for that. The figure of £15 million pounds of additional funding was mentioned. If it is to be made available, it must be additional funding and not funding that is taken from elsewhere within the system.

153

There is also a proposal to move additional responsibilities to schools and to give them the funding to address that from a central pool. As a teaching principal, I feel that I have enough responsibility at present without having to take on more. The funding must be in addition to what exists and not a relocation of funds from elsewhere.

154

There should be some means of allowing teaching principals time to address all of their administrative duties. If I were to be given funding to cover the cost of freeing myself from teaching for one day a week, the money saved could be put to use elsewhere in the school and to the benefit of the children.

155

The Chairperson: Thank you.

156

Ms Andrews: I am the principal of Gaelscoil na bhFál, which is an Irish-medium primary school in the Iveagh area of West Belfast. The Irish-medium sector is very new. I have been involved in Irish-speaking education since 1978, which was back in its early days. I am the principal of a school which was founded in 1987, and it was the second Irish-medium school in Belfast. Interested parents founded it, and it was financed through their own efforts until 1991, when maintained status was granted by the Department of Education.

157

Before 1999 the school's accommodation consisted of mobile classrooms with few facilities for staff or for children. In 1999 we moved to purpose-built accommodation, with which we are delighted. The school has 175 children currently enrolled, and that number is rising. Fifty-seven per cent of the children receive free school meals. All of the children come from English-speaking backgrounds and the history of our school and its pupil profile is replicated through most of the Irish-medium sector.

158

The school's budget is quite healthy at present, and one of the reasons for that is the low experience profile of its staff - an experience shared by the integrated sector. Most of our staff are young and have just finished training college, so salary costs are not high. The overheads for our previous accommodation were also not very high. The school is overcautious about spending. Because the school used to be non-funded it is very careful about how it spends money. Gaelscoil na bhFál used to be unsure whether there was enough money to do until the end of the week, so there is a high level of caution in its approach to money. It takes a while to get used to having money. There is also a shortage of services in Irish that we can buy in.

159

All those factors contribute to our current comfortable financial situation. However, that situation is due to change. The teachers are moving up the salary scale, and the overheads of the new accommodation are high compared with those previous. The infrastructure of the Irish-medium sector and the services provided for it are being developed, and there are now more services available to buy in to.

160

I welcome the move towards the more equitable distribution of funds across the five boards, and this is probably a good time to mention the additional needs that the Irish-medium sector has. There are three levels to that - the second language situation, English as a further core subject in the sector and materials for the sector.

161

All our children come from English-speaking homes. Language is the machine that drives the curriculum, and children must have high levels of receptive language and high productive levels of Irish if they are to deal adequately with the curriculum. That means that there must be a systematic structure in place - not only to teach a second language but also to deliver the rest of the curriculum through the language.

162

The teacher is the sole resource of Irish that the children have. In the English-speaking sector the language of the school is the language of the greater environment. Everything that happens in school is being consolidated outside the school. That is not the case in the Irish-medium sector. The children only have the teacher as the source of their language, and high levels of language are very important in dealing with the curriculum.

163

In order to promote high levels of language acquisition or competence, it is important that there is a low pupil/teacher ratio - lower than that in the English-medium sector. There is a financial element involved in having smaller classes in the Irish-medium sector in order to deal with the exposure to the second language.

164

We do not begin to teach English in the Irish-medium sector until the children are in Primary 4. At that stage the children's levels of English oracy are well developed, but within four years we have to bring them to levels of literacy that are comparable with their peers in the English-medium sector. Some, but not all, of the literacy skills that they have already developed to a fairly high degree in Irish can be transferred. In order to bring the children's levels of English to a level comparable with the English-medium sector the more favourable pupil/teacher ratio that was necessary in Key Stage 1 for second language acquisition must also follow through to Key Stage 2 for English.

165

Finally, I want to draw attention to the issue of materials in the Irish-medium sector. The availability and use of high quality materials are very important factors in delivering a high quality curriculum and appropriate and useful learning experiences to the children. There have been a number of initiatives from the Department of Education where it has looked at the provision of resources for the Irish-medium sector. I welcome that, but there is still a critical shortage in materials in the Irish-medium sector for reading, history, geography, science, information and communication technology (ICT) and mathematics.

166

By and large, teachers in the Irish-medium sector have to be involved in providing a broad range of basic materials to the sector. That requires them being released from class to create materials and to adapt materials from English. It involves them working with one another and with teachers from other schools in order to provide those materials. It also requires the employment of office and technical staff as part of a desktop publishing team to do typesetting, layout, graphics, proof-reading, binding and laminating. I, as principal of the school, have also found myself involved in the creation and preparation of materials, and as co-ordinator of the desktop publishing team, I am also heavily involved in that. The formula should allow for this type of expenditure in the long term.

167

Thank you for your interest and patience, and I hope that you will take the points that I have made into consideration.

168

The Chairperson: Thank you. On behalf of the Committee I want to put some questions to each of you. It may not be a "yes" or "no" answer. The proposals are not those of the Education Committee but of the Department of Education. We are looking at the issue and informing ourselves about people's views. Are the proposals likely to create a school system that would assist the boards, principals and teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs? Would they create a fair and transparent system that is simple to operate and easy to understand?

169

Mrs Ferguson: The proposals will definitely be an improvement on the present situation as far as the primary sector is concerned. I am concerned that they are taking funds from secondary schools and putting them into primary schools. I do not like what is being suggested about special needs. It is not going to help us in the small primary school. What we are getting at present is totally inadequate, and under this system it is not going to change very much. They need to look at the issue of special needs. I calculate that a school of my size will be helped with between £6,000 to £10,000. Any amount of money will help us, but it is not going to give the children the education that we really want to give them - for that we would need about £30,000.

170

Ms Houston: There is a genuine attempt to be more transparent in the funding issues, and I welcome that. The issue of the code of practice has been introduced into our schools without proper funding. They think that targeting social need is picking this up, but it is not. I have some excellent children from very poor families who come to school ready to work and behave wonderfully all day, and perhaps the money is not necessary there. However, I have some children from more affluent homes who come in their four-wheel-drive vehicles and cause mayhem in our school because of their challenging behaviour.

171

It is difficult for the Committee to find an indicator to give a fair system to target the actual needs. If the code of practice became the basis for this, the number of children who were at stage 1 or 2 of the code of practice in your school would be a realistic indicator of the need that is in the school. The numbers receiving free school meals, on the other hand, is just an arbitrary figure. It is just a best guess, and it does not always show the need.

172

Mr Lombard: Our experience is that the Department's proposal to hold staff centrally would be a retrograde step. We feel that we have benefited more by controlling the ability to hire our own staff.

173

With regard to special needs, my experience is in inner-city work. I have been an inner-city principal for twelve years now. I have worked in areas of 80% unemployment. It is difficult to explain the effects of an area like that where so few people have work and where, for many, there has been no work from one generation to the next.

174

Often, in areas of high unemployment, the effects of that on children are such that they do not see the value of learning because they have never seen anyone reap the benefits of it. I am talking about an area in east Belfast that people think is leafy. It is not. The lower east side of east Belfast has large pockets of deprivation. We were able to benefit from the free school meals ratio by having extra teachers to help us. It also generates huge behavioural problems of almost anarchical proportions. It is difficult to explain what it is like to teach in a school like that; you have to work with the best material that you have. Sometimes it can be very hard in areas of social deprivation.

175

I am concerned that the Department is tying special needs to the Key Stage results. There is an element of discretion used in the Key Stage exams, and they are internally administered. The Department has said that every school will want to do well. I am not sure that it is a sensible, reliable and valid way to administer the special needs fund.

176

I would be a lot happier if every school got some benefit from the special needs fund. I come from an inner-city school, but I still feel that that budget should be divided so that where you get high concentrations of children from inner-city areas where there is no employment, or where we have one or two failing schools, that those schools can be helped. Such schools can be found in all sectors, and they should be helped.

177

Mr Crudden: I feel that the proposals would benefit the schools, providing that the funds are extra ones and are applied equitably across all schools and board areas. With my allocated budget, I am expected to pay for some things in my school that principals in other board areas are not expected to pay for. There needs to be equality across all five boards.

178

Will it improve the quality of education that we deliver to our children? We hope that the more money we have in schools, the better education we can give. However, the quality of education will only improve if I start off on an equal footing to other schools in a similar situation. In other words, what is going to happen to the £52,000 deficit that I inherited? There is no point in giving me additional funding if I still have a chain around my neck that is dragging me down. From that point of view, I would want to start off at nought.

179

Ms Andrews: A situation has existed across the five boards where five different formulae were applied. Schools in similar circumstances have found themselves having more or having less than other schools. Such an iniquitous situation should be ended and an overall formula found for all five boards.

180

There are two issues involved. First, there should be sufficient money in the budgets to allow for the proper delivery of the curriculum. I am not sure how you arrive at that sum, but we all accept that the budget needs to be sufficient to allow the curriculum to be delivered appropriately. My colleagues appear to be in a different situation from me as they are struggling, and in some cases in major debt, because the budget allocation to deliver the curriculum effectively has been insufficient. There needs to be an increase overall. We do not want the situation to develop where money is being moved around to make it look as if extra money has been put into people's budgets. More money overall needs to be put into the budgets.

181

The document recognises the second issue, which is the problem of schools having different relative needs. The question is what constitutes a legitimate additional need, because all schools can say that they have a particular need. The legitimate additional needs need to be identified so that they can receive further funding.

182

Mr Gallagher: You are saying that money for special needs is inadequate, both presently and probably in the new arrangements. Are you talking about special needs as perceived in the school or are you talking about pupils with statements through the educational psychology service? My second question relates to Mr Crudden's school and is about high numbers of pupils on free school meals.

183

Mr Crudden: I do not have a high number of pupils on free school meals.

184

Mr Gallagher: Sorry; I misunderstood you. My impression was that you said you had but that your pupils were not taking up the school meals.

185

Mr Crudden: I do not have a high uptake of free school meals.

186

Mrs Ferguson: The school tries to deal with pupils with special educational needs within the classroom. If this is not working, those special needs pupils receive additional support outside the classroom. If their special needs are still not being met, the school asks for an educational psychologist's report. Every stage is carried out according to the code of practice. The first stage of identifying the need within the classroom does not require much additional money. However, if the pupil requires more specialised help, money is needed to provide support. At stage 3, pupils are referred to the board's educational psychologist. By the time they have been assessed, there is usually a real problem that is not being dealt with, and more money is needed to cater for the needs of those children. I have some children who have been statemented in the school but I have about 10% to 20% of my children at different stages, all with different needs. Even the first two stages are difficult to fund as the school is funding it although there is a little help at later stages from outside.

187

Mr Crudden: I was endeavouring to make the point that the low uptake of free school meals in my school does not mean that we do not have social deprivation, which exists in a number of other areas within the school. I do not receive enough money under the heading of social deprivation because I have a low uptake of free school meals.

188

Ms Houston: There seems to have been a deliberate attempt to include special needs children into mainstream school, and that is what our integrated school is all about. Out of 406 pupils that situation has resulted in us having a special needs register of 94 children who would range from being extremely autistic, deaf and wheelchair-bound to children who have not been statemented because the educational psychologists in Belfast are told not to statement children unless there is some provision for them. These children for whom there is no provision can disrupt a class at the drop of a hat. There is nowhere within the system to support them or their families, but they need help. If we are going to effect change it is not only the child who requires help but the family also.

189

Mr Lombard: In the 1970s children whose quotients in maths and reading were less than 85 were deemed to have special needs and they got extra assistance. The goalposts have shifted since then. Nowadays, 70 is considered to be at the low end of "below average". A child will have to have an IQ of below 60 to get into a special unit. The limit is constantly being reduced to accommodate the greater degree of special needs that is now recognised. Perhaps it was always there; it is, however, more widely acknowledged now.

190

The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentations. We look forward to studying the matter in depth.

Thursday 20 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Fee
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:

Mr D Cargo ) Belfast Education and
Mr D Megaughin ) Library Board
Mr N Todd )

191

The Chairperson: Good afternoon, Gentlemen, and welcome to our public evidence session. We found your written submission very helpful.

192

Mr Cargo: Thank you very much, Chairperson, for this opportunity to give oral evidence. I do not have detailed knowledge of all the board's systems and procedures, so I am accompanied by David Megaughin, chief finance officer, and Nathan Todd, assistant senior education officer.

193

Perhaps it would be useful to put the current proposals for the local management of schools (LMS) into a wider context. That should assist the Committee in its scrutiny of them. LMS is a product of the Education Reform Order 1989, which was a markedly different model for education, with winners and losers, a national curriculum framework, open enrolment and league tables.

194

The strength of the concept financially is that it puts responsibility for spending close to the spender. There are, however, weaknesses in this model, as there are in any model. To put an amount of money into 1,500 little pockets obviously leads to some fragmentation. There is tension in the system between equity of treatment and equality of opportunity. One by-product of the LMS model has been a greater use of earmarked funds to plug gaps in provision. The current proposals have emerged because of a lack of credibility in relation to the equity of treatment under the formula. The proposals, although laudable, appear to tinker with the current model.

195

We want the Committee to consider four questions in its deliberations. First, should any education system in the twenty-first century be funded through a system of winners and losers? The current proposals seem to accept that there will be winners and losers. Secondly, should any future funding model be built around the flawed concept of average teaching costs? That concept is at the core of the current proposals. Thirdly, the Programme for Government promised to work for a cohesive, inclusive and just society, with targeting social need (TSN) at the core of that. Will the proposals offer equality of opportunity to all young people, especially to the most disadvantaged? Finally, there are two other major consultation documents in current circulation - one on post-primary education and one on the curriculum review. Funding is simply a vehicle for delivering strategic objectives. Will the current funding proposals deliver the strategic objectives of both the Burns review and the curriculum review?

196

Mr Megaughin: The paper includes both a "low" and a "high aggregated schools budget" (ASB). The "low ASB" model concerns us because of its impact on schools - in the Belfast Board area it would mean at least 80 fewer teachers. The document tends towards the "high ASB" model, but it is useful to set out the downside of the "low ASB" model.

197

The other problem for the Belfast Board, and perhaps for other boards, would be the schools having to manage their own budgets at the reduced level of £2·4 million. That would make things even more difficult for them.

198

We have three concerns in relation to the "high ASB" model. First, it will require additional funding - around £15 million. We want to be sure that the method of financing that would be open and transparent, because the Belfast Board has traditionally funded its schools at the higher level. We would want to be sure, if that sum were additional finance, that the Belfast Board would also be able to avail of it. That should become clear in the assessment of relative needs exercise (ARNE) that is conducted by the Department.

199

Secondly, the ASB forms only a part of the money that is spent on schools. We need to ensure that all boards would be making provision for similar central items - those services that are delivered on behalf of schools. There is no point in having a common formula for the delegated part if the centrally held part is different in each board area.

200

The third issue follows on from our consultation with the schools. There is a general movement of funds from the post-primary to the primary sector within the proposals. The primary sector would be pleased to receive that, but it would not want it to be at the expense of the post-primary sector. Most of the financial difficulties are being experienced in the primary sector at present. We feel that transferring the resources from one sector to another is simply transferring the problem.

201

Mr Todd: We strongly believe that the targeting of social need to combat deprivation must be a fundamental part of the formula funding process. Our submission makes manifest the effects of deprivation in relation to educational outcomes. We have concerns, however, about achieving equality of opportunity under the proposals.

202

There should be a deeper examination of how social deprivation and special educational needs are measured as inputs to formula funding. The continued use of free school meals, for example, or the Key Stage test results, should be examined further. We believe there are severe flaws in those.

203

The current review of the curriculum is likely to impact on Key Stage testing, because the testing has to follow the current review and the assessment by the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment. However, the document proposes that test results should become one of the major indicators of special educational needs. Also, schools might become the victims of their own success. Schools that improve could find that the amount of money that they receive for TSN is reduced, and the problems might reoccur. That vicious circle needs to be addressed. We welcome the increase in moneys proposed for TSN, but we have those concerns.

204

Mr Megaughin: The treatment of teachers' salaries is probably the most important issue. Teachers' salaries represent a large proportion of a school's funding - around 85%. In Belfast schools, the figures range from 52% to 100%. That situation has arisen because the current model is an average-based model. It is pupil driven, and it does not take account of teacher mix, teacher profile or age profile. That aspect must be addressed in the current exercise.

205

We are not proposing the removal of accountability or decision-making from the local level. The proposal document tends to imply that that would be removed from LMS, but that is not what we are proposing. We are suggesting that the treatment and funding of it should be reviewed to ensure that schools have adequate funding to pay for their agreed teaching complement. They should also have funding left to cover non-teaching costs. The current formula does not take account of that.

206

There is a factor for salary protection in the document. If that were implemented in Belfast, 80% of schools would qualify for salary protection. That clearly demonstrates that the basic formula is inadequate. The document should build in a factor to take account of actual teachers' salary costs rather than use the averaging method.

207

The Chairperson: To what extent do you feel the need to sustain your position as an education and library board and to justify your existence - along with that of the other boards - in any representations that you make to the Committee or to the Department of Education? How critical is that factor in your representations?

208

Mr Cargo: That is a difficult question to answer because, in any situation, you can always be accused of trying to justify your own existence.

209

We have tried to ensure that our response reflects the views of the entire education community in Belfast. In examining the proposals and preparing our response, we carried out a wide consultation exercise, involving all schools, to ensure that such views were taken into account.

210

For some time, there has been general agreement among the five boards - which are the key funding bodies for the vast majority of schools in the controlled and maintained sectors - that average teaching costs are an almost fatal flaw at the core of the current system. Although the mix of problems varies depending on the size of the schools in each of the board areas, the core problem is that average teaching costs play such a key role in determining whether you are a winner or a loser under the formula. The five boards have been keen for some time to have discussions with teachers' unions, other partners and the Department to highlight the fact that, ultimately, the use of average teaching costs does not allow schools to do what they should be doing.

211

The proposals aim to ensure that teachers and principals have the appropriate resources to provide high-quality education. In that respect, there is no vested interest on the part of the boards. It could, perhaps, be argued that there is an element of vested interest in relation to the amount of money that is retained at the centre for central services.

212

Schools are continually asking the boards to provide more and more services. For example, the boards have received representations from Assembly Members, and other public representatives, asking that additional resources be provided for individual special educational needs cases. We try to respond to such requests.

213

We are increasingly being asked to do more, but, as Mr Megaughin pointed out, for some time now the Belfast Board's commitment has been to delegate as much of its budget to schools as is possible. Our central services have suffered as a consequence. However, we have acknowledged that it is important to give money directly into the hands of schools, to allow them to provide as high a quality of education as possible.

214

Mr Gallagher: The concept behind the Department's proposal is to direct more money to schools. The Committee is not clear where exactly this money will come from or from whom it will be taken. You made the point that it is important that the boards are not disadvantaged. Earlier today, witnesses told us of their concerns in relation to special needs underfunding. If extra money is not put into the system - if it has to be taken from some other sector - how much money will you have available for special needs? If the board were squeezed to help to accumulate the £15 million, would the area of special needs, which you have responsibility for, be further hit?

215

Mr Megaughin: The Belfast Board's position is different to that of the other boards. The level of funding that would be required for schools in Belfast would be about £400,000 less than the current level. We would not have to divert money from other services, although other boards might have to do that.

216

On special needs, TSN funding in Belfast amounts to some £8 million to £9 million a year. It is distributed to schools under the formula funding. That should be unaffected. It is difficult to tell from the proposals, but the total amount available will increase from 5% to 5·5%. The method of distribution is to be changed, but we currently do not have the base data to assess whether that would result in an increase or decrease in the amount. In broad terms, the Belfast Board expects to be able to manage the "high ASB" model. It might, however, present problems for the other boards.

217

Mr S Wilson: You say that the amount of centrally-held money should be similar for each education and library board, regardless of the ASB model used. Given that some boards require more money for school transport than others, how is such an outcome to be achieved?

218

I am confused about how your suggestion on teacher costs will allow schools to keep their autonomy. You say that there should be agreed teacher complements, funded at actual costs. You then say that if that is done, schools are guaranteed an appropriate level of funding, but they can still control the total number of teachers employed. How can that be? If I, as a principal, decide to employ a younger teacher, the actual cost will go down and, therefore, the amount of funding that I get will go down. The number of teachers that I employ will be dictated by the teaching complement, which the board would presumably decide on my behalf. How do you ensure autonomy? The evidence that we have had so far shows that the use of actual teaching costs takes away autonomy from boards of governors.

219

Finally, everybody, except the Department, is telling us that use of the free school meals indicator is a bad method of allocating funds for special educational needs. School principals from the maintained, controlled and integrated sectors have told us that. You are also telling us that there are difficulties with it. How would you allocate the money for special educational needs if it were not based on free school meals?

220

Mr Megaughin: Our proposals on the teacher situation are as you have outlined. However, schools have other financial pressures. Under our model, schools would have a core element for teaching and a further element for non-teaching. This is where the flexibility for boards of governors would come in. Some schools will have a lot of grounds to maintain, but others will not. A school without a lot of grounds to maintain could opt for an additional teacher. Conversely, the governors could opt to employ fewer teachers than would be the standard. We have not fully thought through how the standards would be set, but governors, with their own organisation and local knowledge, could perhaps operate at a level below the standard level. That could create additional funding for the school. Such money would remain in the delegated budget and would not be clawed back to the centre.

221

Mr S Wilson: That is not going to be the case. Under the proposals, money allocated for sports will no longer be allocated on the basis of the size of grounds to be maintained - it will be based on an amount per head.

222

Mr Megaughin: We have pointed that out in our response to the Department. We feel that it has missed the point on the sports factor because not all land is used for sports. The schools, in our opinion, are not being funded for the non-sport land.

223

Mr Cargo: We have ended up with an English local education authority (LEA) formula. It was introduced in late 1989. The current proposals are about tinkering with that formula. We are suggesting - especially in light of having a local Assembly with devolved powers - that it is important to look at the way in which we fund our education service. Perhaps we should start from a slightly different base. We may need to work up an alternative model, but we are saying that, at the core of that model, there is the need to give schools the confidence that they will get the funding required for their core teaching duties. Obviously, other moneys will be available within whatever new funding formula emerges, and schools will still have the flexibility to vary the core teaching complement if they wish to do so. We want a new concept at the core of the formula. We should devise a new formula rather than tinker with one which, even in England, has moved on because of the "fair funding" regime.

224

Mr S Wilson: You could not go below the complement because actual costs would fall.

225

The Chairperson: What about the free school meals element?

226

Mr Todd: We acknowledge that free school meals are a very crass and blunt indicator. People do not always sign up for free school meals because of the stigma attached. We do not have the ultimate answer, but there needs to be a further examination of the very complex concept of social deprivation. To measure social deprivation by using the crude indicator of the number of parents who deign to sign up for free school meals is not a valid way of ensuring equality of opportunity.

227

Mr McHugh: The free school meals indicator could become an even blunter instrument. The value for money for those who are paying for their meals has almost led to a situation where people will not even be on free school meals. They simply cannot afford the kind of price for the value that they get in food at the schools, especially those parents who have two or three children at school. Seemingly, that is all going to change, but I suppose that there is no other indicator.

228

Should there be increased funding for schools that have a higher percentage of pupils taking free school meals? In relation to the figures of 5% or 5·5%, how much do you think is needed for TSN?

229

Mr Megaughin: On the question of tiering, the Belfast Education and Library Board is currently the only board that operates a threshold. We have a 20% threshold. A school with less than 20% free school meals does not attract TSN funding. Our support is weighted towards the higher end of the scale. Yes, we currently support that, and we will be supporting it within the proposals.

230

The Chairperson: Is that fair?

231

Mr S Wilson: No, it is totally unfair.

232

Mr Megaughin: If a threshold is not set, all free school meals children are targeted. However, we want to target the very needy, and that is why we operate a 20% threshold.

233

The Chairperson: What about the schools that fall just below the threshold? Their need is every bit as great as the schools that are above the limit. Is that not the difficulty of creating such a barrier?

234

Mr Megaughin: We recognise that any cut-off point creates problems. The proposals will have a sliding scale. From 0% upwards you will receive something; you will not have a sudden drop if you just fall below 20%.

235

Mr McHugh: My second point was in relation to the 5·5%.

236

Mr Todd: It is difficult to put pounds and pence - or percentages - to it. We would welcome the increase, but we hope that it would not be at the expense of some other area. If you increase it to 6% or 6·5%, you might be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Mr Megaughin made the point about needing a fundamental reappraisal of how we fund our schools. A related issue is the amount of earmarked funding that the Belfast Education and Library Board has to put into schools to act almost as polyfiller in the existing gaps. We are very unhappy about that. We get a tremendous amount of money from the Department under earmarked initiatives. They are time bound, and there is no continuity to them. We would prefer to see a fundamental reappraisal of the education system. We need to decide what we want the education system to produce and then fund it to produce the desired outcomes. At present, we appear to be running an input model as opposed to looking at an output model.

237

Mr Gibson: I am very interested in this Ulster model, or "occupied Six Counties" model. We need to explore how to equality test it, or to do an impact assessment, in relation to a very small rural school. The alternative is a long bus journey, yet we have to deliver an equal curriculum. How can we factor that into a model? All schools, because of the geographic and the deprivation factors, differ greatly. What factors can we put into a system to cater for remote rural schools and to deliver the education that they are duty bound to get?

238

The Chairperson: To put that another way, how would your proposals impact on the rest of Northern Ireland, given that you have made a submission on behalf of the Belfast Education and Library Board?

239

Mr Megaughin: All of those proposals are not factored to suit the Belfast Board. No calculations have been carried out to see whether this is good or bad for Belfast. They are based on principled reason, in conjunction with the views of all five chief finance officers. That is replicated at chief executive level.

240

Mr Cargo: I understand your point. Although I am based in the city at the moment, I have worked in two boards that had a lot of rural schools. I understand the importance of the school to the rural community in other board areas. The core costs in a small school are teacher costs. Our only equivalent are nursery schools - one-teacher nursery units. In some of our nursery units, 100% of the funding goes on salaries, and they have no money to provide anything else. We have then to consider mechanisms for trying to bolster their existence using discretionary money.

241

If you move to a position where you acknowledge that there are inescapable costs to running education provision wherever it is - and at the core of that are teachers' salaries - you can then develop a model based upon schools being given those actual costs. It is a redistribution of wealth to some degree. However, that redistribution is based on a more solid foundation than that of a notional average teaching cost. I know that the Western Board's formula reflects the fact that it has to sustain substantial numbers of small schools in areas where it has really no alternative. It must cater for the population there.

242

Mr Fee: If we are going to have a single common formula that applies to all pupils in all schools, is that not, in itself, a compelling argument for a central funding agency? We have heard a number of sectors saying that they feel that that would be a logical conclusion.

243

A lot of the grievances arise, not from the actual formula, but from the differences in how the boards apply the formula - even in responding to schools that advise them of having pupils with dyslexia, Asperger's syndrome and motor neuron disease, et cetera. In some board areas, students are statemented and resources are put in, but in other board areas the problems are not even recognised. Some sectors therefore believe that there is a strong argument for a central funding agency. You have investigated that to some extent. What is your view?

244

Mr Cargo: The establishment of a quango to handle funds for the education service is, of course, an option that is open to Government. I do not want to comment on whether an additional quango, in an already crowded field, is good or bad. We do not directly fund voluntary grammar schools or grant-maintained integrated schools at present. However, in Belfast, I have just concluded an agreement with one of the grant-maintained integrated schools to provide all of its services, because we can provide them more cheaply and effectively than others. We also provide services to voluntary grammar schools. My experience is that while there may be political - with a small "p" - attitudes taken from time to time, all of the schools that we deal with are more than happy with the services that they receive in relation to the current funding arrangements. While some individuals think that we should do more, our track record in the last few years shows that the vast majority of our service users are content that we are trying to provide a high-quality service within the resources available to us.

245

The Chairperson: Are the current proposals likely to create a schools system that will assist the boards, principals and teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs? Will the proposals create a fair and transparent system which is simple to operate and easy to understand?

246

Mr Cargo: There are two major reviews currently under way - the major curriculum review and the post-primary education review. To move to revised funding arrangements, without a clear, strategic direction for the system over the next few years, may not be the best thing to do. I am not sure that it would be wise to change the formula while the outcome of the Province's education strategy is unclear.

247

Mr Todd: Formula funding may be a major part of the total funding that schools receive, but it is only a part. There is a lot of earmarked funding in Belfast, and that is outside of any formula funding. We need a broader review of the entire funding arrangements, to address the needs of schools in whatever board area, or part of a board area, they happen to be.

248

Mr K Robinson: It is obvious from Mr Cargo's comments, from the background to the problem, and from some of this morning's presentations, that there is distress in the schools at present. How do the officers hope to deal with that immediate financial distress, as opposed to finding the long-term solution to the problem?

249

Mr Megaughin: There is a growing problem of school deficits in Belfast, caused partly by falling enrolments. We operate a support function, which forms the major part of the administration of the budget. The formula application is a very small part of the operation - we devote most of our LMS staff time to school support. We have regular meetings with schools to draw up three-year plans to help them to get out of their deficits. We are actively involved with every school.

250

Mr K Robinson: Unfortunately, the simple way for a school to get out of a deficit is to make a teacher redundant.

251

Mr Megaughin: That is the simple way - it is not always the only way, but it is the most obvious. We must think about the children in the school. You cannot just cut the number of teachers - you must look at the service that is being provided.

252

Mr K Robinson: Basic education is the area that we are cutting into again and again.

253

The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation and the discussion, Gentlemen. We look forward to continuing that dialogue at some stage.

Thursday 20 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Fee
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:
Mr Ó Muireagáin )
Mr MacCionnaith ) Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta
Mr M Gribben )

254

The Chairperson: Good afternoon. As representatives from the Irish-medium sector, you are welcome to this evidence session. We apologise for keeping you waiting, and we look forward to hearing what you have to say.

255

Mr Ó Muireagáin: I thank the Committee for giving us the opportunity to present the case for Irish- medium education at this level - that is very important to us. We have not been able to do this for many years, and it is good to have the opportunity now.

256

I am from Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta, which is the body charged with looking after the interests of Irish-medium education, under the auspices of the Department. Seán MacCionnaith is principal of an Irish-medium school in Derry, Bunscoil Cholm Cille. Mario Gribben is the principal of an English-speaking school with an Irish-medium unit in Portadown.

257

The communication that we sent to the Department covers the issues in much more depth than the points that I will make. All of the points that I will make will be connected at various levels, although they might seem to be separate. I hope that the document illustrates the added workload of teachers in Irish-medium schools and units, which carry many added costs in regard to translation and the resources that are required to deliver the curriculum. The teachers must take the time to translate the curriculum into Irish in order to teach it to the children. Teachers must put in extra time to translate audio tapes, textbooks and study programmes. They have extra burdens to bear in addition to the accepted burdens that all teachers have. For example, Irish-medium teachers have more contact with parents.

258

In 90% of cases, the parents of our pupils are from English-speaking backgrounds. Therefore, teachers must take extra time to explain the different stages of the curriculum and how the children are progressing. The parents cannot do the homeworks with their children, so teachers need to take extra time to explain those difficulties to parents. Some of the work is translated into English in order for parents to understand the children's homework and the school's practice.

259

Irish-medium units within an English-speaking school might be the Department's preferred option for Irish-medium education, but the document accepts that most of those units would be a self-contained school within the mother school, and the units should be treated similarly to small schools. We support that view.

260

We propose that the budgetary needs of a unit within an English-medium school should be calculated in the same way as the budgetary needs of a small school. The rationale used in the document to explain the added needs of a small school should also be used with regards to an Irish-medium school, as the same needs apply. Irish-medium units have a separate identity in a school and have separate needs. They have added needs such as with translation and resources because many resources are unavailable to Irish-medium schools or units. The principal of an Irish-medium school has the added problems of balancing the two separate entities, and that should be taken into consideration.

261

One major point in our proposals concerns the pupil:teacher ratio (PTR). That is important because the amount of work that a teacher has to do in translation and in preparing resources depends on the number of pupils. It is crucial to Irish-medium schools to have a lower PTR in order to ensure the success of an immersion education system - which is different to the normal, accepted educational system - where the children are taught in the target language, which is Irish in this case.

262

In an Irish-medium school, the amount of time spent between a pupil and the teacher is much higher because pupils need to hear the language constantly. A child in a big class has a smaller chance of hearing the target language and of obtaining the skills required by the curriculum. Each child needs enough language to be able to learn what is in the curriculum. It requires much more work between the teacher and the pupils for each child to reach that standard, and the ratio therefore needs to be smaller.

263

At Key Stage 2, English language becomes a fourth core subject, thus adding to a teacher's workload. Again, that necessitates a smaller PTR in order for that to be done effectively. A smaller PTR also helps avoid having composite classes. Composite classes can give problems, particularly in Irish-medium education where, for example, if Key Stage 1 and 2 are in a mixed class, the Key Stage 2 pupils are starting to learn English as a core subject whilst the Key Stage 1 pupils are not yet at the level to learn English. That creates difficulties within the classroom for the teacher. The smaller the ratio, the more able the teacher is to do the work.

264

Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta proposes that the ratio should be set at about 15:1. It is based on the current English-medium average ratio of 19:1. To allow for us working in an immersion education system, we feel that the average ratio should be lower for an Irish-medium school.

265

There are many special circumstances recognised in this document, but they are recognised for other schools rather than for Irish-medium schools. For example, the special circumstances of the travellers require them to have smaller classes. The bulk of those special circumstances would equally apply to Irish- medium schools. We are hoping for a parity of approach in special circumstances, similar to that used for small schools for the children of travellers or armed forces personnel. There are many circumstances that allow for their budgets to be increased or their ratio to be reduced, but they are not applied to Irish-medium schools. We hope that there will be parity of opportunity.

266

The Chairperson: In the consultation document, there is a proposal that the primary units should receive an additional £100 per pupil, and the post-primary units should receive an additional £25 per pupil, in addition to the age-weighted pupil unit (AWPU) allocation. Was this a complete surprise to you, or had you been consulted by the Department in advance of the formal consultation document? Had you made representations for those particular amounts, and were they higher or lower than you had anticipated?

267

Mr MacCionnaith: The document states that there was only additional funding of £20,000 per year available to one Irish-medium school, namely the one that I am working in. The Coopers and Lybrand report was very badly researched and written, as you know. No one spoke to me, or the Western Education and Library Board, with regard to additional Irish-medium provision. They blatantly came to a decision without any information on Irish-medium education. Many other areas of its report have subsequently also been discredited. Consequently, the whole process was slowed down.

268

I have since been speaking about this matter. The Department of Education is very aware of most of the issues. In addition to the issues quoted here under the Irish-medium section, it only refers to two main concerns upon which those figures of £100 and £25 per pupil are based. In fact, as Mr Ó Muireagáin said earlier, two factors upon which those figures are based are only scratching the surface of the issues surrounding the needs of children in Irish-medium schools.

269

The explanation in this document for the need for additional funding is weak. They would be the two most obvious reasons for someone looking at Irish- medium education from the outside in. The figure is arbitrary. It was not pre-determined by the people who wrote the document or their controllers, and it has not been agreed by the Irish-medium sector. As far as I know, the education and library boards have not agreed it either, although they have agreed with it, based again on a degree of ignorance of the needs of Irish-medium units and schools.

270

The boards themselves do not fully understand the needs. They understand what we say the needs are, but they do not have a clue as to how to address them. They have largely failed to address those needs over the years. The Western Board, in particular, is very aware of that. Therefore, those figures are not realistic and do not reflect need.

271

I commend the general approach behind the document. It is going the right way, and it is attempting to be helpful. It is good to see that, but there has not been enough debate on the rationale behind the establishment of those figures. They are based only on the most obvious efficiencies.

272

The Chairperson: I need to offer other members a chance to ask questions.

273

Mr Ó Muireagáin: We had some discussion. The Department recognises that there is a need, but it does not really know how much of a need. When it put this together, it more or less plucked a figure out of the air. That is what that figure is: it is a starting point, inviting response.

274

Mr Fee: I want to ask about teaching aids and the materials available in the Irish language. I assume that for the rest of the curriculum, the Curriculum Council and the Department, and so on, have put together a whole array of teaching aids. Is there any work being done on the provision of a full range of supports - audio tapes, textbooks, et cetera? Are you saying that the unique cost of that is entirely down to the Irish-medium schools?

275

Mr MacCionnaith: There are two issues. You may know that there is a resource centre at St Mary's College, a teacher training college on the Falls Road. It is about five years old. Its budget is insufficient to meet the demand. The materials that it produces are commendable, though not perfect. They are now in colour for the first time, so there is a parity of resources in terms of what the children are being asked to use. In the past they have not been as colourful and attractive as those produced by the big educational companies in Britain who primarily provide us with our resources in English.

276

Some ground has been made up, but it is too little and too slow. It will be 30 years before we have the level of resources that an English-medium school has. If we do have a science textbook, we only have one; we have no choice. If we have a text curriculum, it may not match our curriculum in the North. If we source something from the South in the Irish language, it is in the wrong dialect, and the kids cannot read it. It also may not be relevant to our curriculum, because the South has a different syllabus.

277

There are major problems in regard to not only the amount of resources available but also the type of resources available, the approach to dialect and the presentation. That spans all kinds of resources from the traditional written textbook - which may be in black and white and without pictures because it has been created by the teacher at midnight on a Friday - to audio tapes, videotapes, CDs, hard disks, encyclopaedias, reference materials, and so on.

278

Imagine that you are running an English-medium school and somebody walks in and takes away all the resources that you have available in English, throws you a few in another language and says "Get on with it." It is an absolute nightmare. It takes a huge leap of faith on the part of parents to jump into that big hole of problems.

279

Mr S Wilson: Every school could make special pleading in many of the areas that have been described here. You are asking for £450 per pupil and an additional £34,900 for a teacher. You are asking for a unit co-ordinator. You are asking for a PTR of 20:1, as opposed to the 30:1 or 33:1 that we have heard quoted from some of the other schools that have been here this morning.

280

In a 100-pupil Irish-language school, what additional budget are you asking for to cover your co-ordinator, the three extra teachers that would bring the ratio down to 15:1, the additional money per pupil to develop materials and your small schools allowance? I have a sum in my head, but perhaps you can tell us what that would cost?

281

Mr Gribben: I do not want to discuss global sums. I would prefer to talk about the additional costs that we face.

282

Mr S Wilson: Yes, but I want a global sum.

283

Mr Gribben: I have produced figures for my own school that show the discrepancy in funding. In 1999-2000 the total finance for our Irish unit generated by the children in the school through the funding formula, which is what we are really talking about here, was £20,425. The total cost of the Irish unit was £24,597. The total funds generated per pupil was £1,361. The total cost per pupil was £1,639. That is a shortfall of £278 per pupil.

284

I compared that with a comparable class in a mainstream English-medium school. Each pupil there was generating a surplus of £206. Over an average class of 25 or 26 pupils, that healthy surplus goes to fund the complete management structure of the school, resources and running costs. The next year, my situation got worse.

285

The AWPU for children in the Irish unit was not sufficient. It did not enhance the school budget in any way to provide any of the things that any normal school in the North needs, such as a management structure, a principal, a vice-principal or a senior management team. Speaking on behalf of the Irish units, that would be unique to my school.

286

Mr S Wilson: Why would you need a principal and vice-principal if it is just a unit within a larger school?

287

Mr Gribben: Every child who goes to primary school generates money that funds that.

288

Mr S Wilson: The main school has a principal. You are a unit within a main school. Why should you have a separate principal and vice-principal for a unit?

289

Mr Gribben: I am not -

290

Mr S Wilson: You were saying that it would not fund that.

291

Mr Gribben: I am not talking about an additional principal.

292

Mr S Wilson: You have still not answered the question. For a 100-pupil school, the list of things that you have asked for would come to about an extra £160,000. Are you saying that Irish-language education is so much more expensive that a 100-pupil school requires £1,500 per pupil more than a similar school in the controlled sector? That is what your list of demands adds up to.

293

Mr MacCionnaith: No. To draw back slightly, what we are saying is that this particular section of this report on the Irish-medium sector has not been properly thought out. It does not fully address the picture in reality. You have put a figure on each single item and totalled them. There is no way that a 100-pupil school would be requesting an extra £160,000 - the figure you have suggested - plus the development of the external support systems.

294

The colleges and boards need to develop. They do not have any Irish-language officials. They do not offer any Curriculum Advisory and Support Service (CASS) in the Irish-medium or in immersion education. They have a legal obligation to do that, but they do not do it because they cannot and do not know how.

295

One could not expect that sort of money. What we are saying is that it demonstrates that this package has not been fully thought out. It needs to be re-addressed, based on those two factors that have been included in this document. They have come up with arbitrary figures of £100 for primary schools and £25 for post-primary schools. It follows naturally that if that is the figure for the two factors that have been addressed in this - which, as I said earlier, are only the most obvious ones - then by implication there should be more funding for the ones that have not been addressed.

296

I would like us to draw back, re-address the issue in its totality and come up with a reasonable financial approach to the issues. The PTR and various other issues, such as resources, CASS and the support services from other educational institutions and bodies, can be addressed in a way that will meet the unique needs of Irish-medium education. There is no other immersion programme of education in Northern Ireland except Irish-medium. Its uniqueness and the implications need to be properly addressed. They are not addressed in this document as it stands.

297

Mr McHugh: How much extra TSN funding would be of benefit in addressing the social need of children in your schools?

298

Mr Ó Muireagáin: Unfortunately, this document does not give a clear picture of how the Department intends to pay extra special needs funding in conjunction with free school meals, or of how it will be banded. Until now it has been based on the number of children on free school meals.

299

The document does not clarify how it will affect Irish-medium schools, for example, who have four core curricular subjects instead of the usual three. They gauge it on how the children do in those three subjects, but our main subject is Irish, which is not even counted for special educational needs (SEN) development points. Until the Department clarifies how it is going to work out the figures, we will not know how it is going to affect us. It is not a clear document as far as Irish- medium education is concerned.

300

Mr MacCionnaith: There is a difficulty with TSN in the context of this discussion. TSN is not an Irish-medium-specific issue. TSN is a general social principle which is being used to direct funds towards the education of less-well-off children. It does not really relate directly to Irish-medium education per se. If children in Irish-medium education are entitled to TSN funding, that is really an issue based on the broad principle and exterior to the type of education that they are receiving.

301

In addition, TSN will send money to Irish-medium education where applicable, but many of those children will have special educational needs. The greatest sector in our education system that does not address the special needs of children in terms of support, including exterior services, is the Irish-medium sector, because there is no SEN service from the boards and other support services for our children with regards to Irish as a subject.

302

The Chairperson: Unfortunately, time has beaten us and we are going to lose our quorum.

Thursday 27 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Gallagher
Mr Hamilton
Ms Lewsley
Mr McElduff
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:
Mr Martin ) Western Education and
Mr Rainey ) Library Board

303

The Chairperson: Good morning and welcome to the evidence session of the Committee for Education into the common formula for funding the local management of schools (LMS).

304

Mr McElduff: For the record, I recently became a member of the Western Education and Library Board.

305

Mr Martin: As time is limited, we will shorten our formal presentation, and give the Committee the opportunity to ask questions on the issues raised. We sent the Committee a short document compiled from some more general responses made by the Western Education and Library Board to the Department of Education. We welcome the debate on commonality and we recognise its importance. Therefore, any comments that we make should be seen in that context. We want to ensure that the system which is introduced is good, fair and equitable and gives the best possible opportunity to schools and children.

306

We have set out three issues: the treatment of teachers' salaries, the funding of small schools and the need for the common formula to be matched by a new mechanism for the distribution of resources. It is also important to ensure that whatever happens on commonality, it is tied in with the other major ongoing reviews - the curriculum review and the review of post-primary education.

307

The central element in the Department's proposals on commonality is that schools should be funded at a higher aggregated schools budget (ASB) level. We have looked at the implications of that for the Western Education and Library Board. We recognise that, if the proposals set out in the illustrative models were implemented, they would cost the board an additional £5.7 million. The large budget we receive from the Department of Education is, in effect, two budgets. It is subdivided into the money that we delegate to schools and the money that we use for services to schools.

308

The Western Education and Library Board delegates about £100 million to schools. The budget for services to schools, which includes special schools, special education, transport and meals, is about £50 million. To implement the formula at the higher ASB level would mean finding over £5 million, and that could only come from two possible sources. One is through access to additional funding, and the other is by taking money from the services to schools budget. Therefore, while we are strongly in favour of commonality and wish to ensure that schools get as many resources as possible, it is essential that the Committee and the Assembly are aware of the financial implications involved in implementing the proposals. We want to emphasise that those financial implications will impact on the services to schools. The key services that would be affected are special education, transport, maintenance and meals. I will not labour that point because I am sure that the Committee will have questions about that.

309

The treatment of teachers' salaries and the funding of small schools are interrelated. The treatment of teachers' salaries is important, and Mr Rainey will expand on that if you wish. We have given the Committee two examples of same-size schools with five teachers. Their inescapable commitments could vary by about £20,000 in a budget of £170,000, depending on the amount spent on teachers' salaries.

310

That issue is fundamental, because it has the potential to frustrate the objectives of funding schools on a fair basis and giving all children equitable treatment.

311

The issue of teachers' salaries is exacerbated in our area, because we have so many small schools. Almost 60% of our schools have fewer than 100 pupils. All small schools stand to benefit from the Department's proposals, and that is good news. However, when talking about limited resources, one concern is that some schools have significantly different and inescapable costs. Therefore, some schools will struggle greatly, while other schools will have more resources. I am not suggesting that they will have more resources than they need, but they might have more than comparable schools.

312

Those are the three key areas that we want to highlight. Rather than go into more detail now, I would prefer to elaborate in response to the Committee's questions.

313

The Chairperson: Thank you. Members will now ask questions.

314

Ms Lewsley: What percentage of schools in your board will qualify for support under the teachers' salary protection factor, if the new proposals are implemented?

315

Mr Rainey: A high percentage of primary schools would benefit from the revised proposals to some extent. However, funding will be insufficient to meet the full costs of above-average salaries. It is also important not to lose sight of schools that have below- average salary costs. If the funding is targeted to ensure that there is sufficient money for schools with high salary costs, then we must ask whether we are giving too much money to schools that have below-average salary costs.

316

We presented an illustration that involves two notional five-teacher primary schools. We have demonstrated that school (a) has salary costs which are significantly below the average, whereas school (b)'s costs are significantly above the average. Will we be giving too much money to schools with low costs if the funding is aimed at meeting high costs? Low salary costs can be caused by several reasons; for example, a school may employ relatively newly-qualified teachers who are low down the salary scale. That school will have a significantly lower salary bill.

317

Mr McHugh: On the issue of TSN, the Western Education and Library Board area is one of the most deprived areas measured by any index, as is the Belfast area. Given that fact, why did you not ask for funding of more than 5·5% towards TSN? There appears to be some argument about whether funding of 5·5% is enough.

318

Mr Rainey: The overall figure of 5·5% is targeted specifically at schools that have high levels of social deprivation. The percentage of additional premium funding is significantly higher for those individual schools. It is our impression that schools with high levels of social need are funded at a favourable level.

319

The Chairperson: You are recommending the removal of salaries from the schools' dedicated budgets. In many ways that represents a large proportion of what LMS is about. What format would you use - a new centralised wages body? How do you envisage its progress? Would it not leave the boards of governors with little to do in regard to overall budgeting except in the allocation of relatively minor sums? The highest proportion of any budget is obviously the wages. How do you square that with delegating responsibility?

320

Mr Rainey: The system in Scotland is widely accepted by the public. In that system, schools are entitled to levels of funding determined on the basis of their characteristics. That sort of arrangement is worthy of exploration. It would not be necessary to take all salary costs out of the LMS arrangements. It might be preferable to leave some portion of staffing costs within delegated budgets. We recognise that there are arguments in favour of allowing individual schools a degree of flexibility. It would be possible to underwrite or guarantee certain minimum levels of staffing, with discretion given to schools to augment that from the resources available to them.

321

Mr Martin: We recognise the strength of the point that you are making, Mr Chairman. It is a question of how to square the principle of LMS with this element. However, while boards of governors enjoy that freedom and flexibility, in reality they have very little room for movement. Huge proportions of their costs are inescapable. They do not really have decisions to make.

322

A primary school of a certain size must have x number of teachers for that size. The setting of a basic minimum level, which would be funded, would go a long way to meeting the points that you have raised.

323

The Chairperson: Do you believe that salaries should be paid on the current average basis, or, as many have suggested, on an actual basis?

324

Mr Rainey: In our view, the full actual costs of the salaries in post should be made available to the school.

325

Mr Martin: However, the actual costs should be based on a fair formula that ensures a certain level of staffing and promotion. In other words, schools cannot go mad and expect the actual costs to be met, but there should be a basic formula that is fair and equitable.

326

The Chairperson: So that they are not all vice- principals, as it were.

327

Mr Martin: Absolutely.

328

Mr S Wilson: I am concerned about a number of the suggestions that you have made. First of all, you are saying that salaries should be removed from the schools budget. You are also suggesting that many schools would welcome the transfer of the maintenance arrangements back to the board. I only have every other page of your submission, so it is a little disjointed. Given the fact that about 80% of the budget goes on salaries - I am not sure what percentage goes on maintenance - are you not really saying in your proposals that you want to take budgets back from schools?

329

That means that control of the budgets for maintenance and salaries would be centralised again. Oddly, we heard evidence last week from school practitioners to the effect that schools - small or large, rural or urban - almost universally welcomed the flexibility of having control of a sizeable slice of their budget, despite the difficulties entailed.

330

Mr Martin: We will not die in the ditch over the issue of maintenance. We simply tried to reflect the views of a significant number of schools. The split between landlord and tenant maintenance is 70:30. Landlord maintenance takes up 70% of our budget - our maintenance budget could be upwards of about £5 million, although it has been supplemented. We are concerned that, due to budget pressures, schools may have neglected the tenant maintenance element. We want schools to be well kept, but we will not die in the ditch about it.

331

Mr S Wilson: You are unhappy about the split within special educational needs between free-meals entitlement and Key Stage II. You disagreed with the allocation of 25·25. Should there be no budgetary allowance - or a lesser allowance -for free school meals within the special educational needs sector? If so, what should replace them?

332

Mr Rainey: We are conscious of the fact that free schools meals are already a factor with regard to social deprivation in the formula. Since LMS began, we have been searching for an effective means of measuring the funding requirements for their pupils' special needs. The Key Stage results offer us an opportunity to introduce a more accurate measure of the relative special needs task facing individual schools and their funding requirements.

333

Mr McElduff: You touched fleetingly on the Scottish arrangements - how do they provide a good model for us?

334

Mr Rainey: In Scotland, schools are guaranteed a certain level of funding, which is linked to the number of pupils that they have and the number of staff that would be appropriate for enrolment. That funding is guaranteed, outwith a dedicated budget. We must explore in detail how that works. The Department of Education has had some discussion with representatives of Scottish authorities - although I do not know the details of those meetings, we believe that this issue deserves further exploration.

335

Mr Gallagher: Thank you for the submission. I will return to the issue of centrally-held money for covering services such as school transport and special education. Where does the Western Education and Library Board sit in the league table of school transport spending? That board covers a rural area, and I suppose that it would be near the top of that league.

336

You said that, on the basis of the proposals, almost £6 million must be found from centrally-held money for the Western Education and Library Board to maintain services at the current level. That money can either be found by the Department, or from schools' budgets; otherwise the board will be short of money. If that formula is put into effect, the money must be made available to schools. School transport is very important in rural areas, and most education and library boards will have to provide transport for children with special needs. If the money cannot be found, how will those services be affected?

337

Mr Martin: That is illustrated on page three of our submission to the Department. It is only an illustration -a hypothetical exercise. We investigated where we could find £5·7 million for the delegated school budgets. We had to end up with the figure of £5·7 million. We sliced £1·1 million off the £9·5 million budget for transport, and £1·3 million off the £11·5 million budget for special education. I hasten to add that this was a theoretical exercise. We would have to cut £1 million off the maintenance budget and £1 million from the central school budget. That would devastate services to schools. Imagine the consequences if we had to run a school transport service that cost about £10 million with about £9 million. It cannot be done.

338

We will not be able to provide the extra special needs classroom assistants that schools are clamouring for if we have to reduce our budget by £1 million. If the aggregated schools budget (ASB) is implemented at the higher level, money must be found from somewhere. If the money is taken from existing services, those services will suffer. The provision of school transport and school meals would be crippled, and maintenance and special education would be significantly reduced. We might have to cut out the curriculum advisory support service (CASS). That would be the effect of such cuts.

339

The Chairperson: Would you be happy to use the other model, or are there serious problems with that too? You said that the costs involved in the high ASB would have far-reaching consequences. Are you satisfied with the other model?

340

Mr Martin: Whatever model is implemented, the consequences for schools and school services must be taken into account. We also looked at the consequences of the low ASB, and we set those out in the table on page three of our written submission. Again, we are talking about winners and losers. If more money must go out to schools, money must come from somewhere.

341

We are talking about a different funding mechanism. The current sources of funding, the boards, are funded through the exercise for the assessment of relative needs. It states on page three that we should be getting 19·1% of that instead of 18·7%, which would mean that there would need to be a redistribution amongst boards that would give the Western Board an extra £2·2 million.

342

If you are going to give money out to schools, then you must put money into the source of funding. Under the relative needs exercise the Western Board should be getting that. Those are some of the implications. Our board would be happy about the implementation at the lower level provided the money is skewed or redistributed in such a way. Otherwise we would have to find £2·2 million to put into schools.

343

I must make another point - our board, on average, funds schools relatively well if you look at the comparative tables. The problem is that we have so many small schools that the cost per pupil is much higher. In some small primary schools the cost per pupil is £2,400, whereas in some of the larger primary schools it is £1,400.

344

The Chairperson: We are almost out of time. What would you say to those who level the criticism against the boards - not just the Western Board but all five area education boards - that money is being used that would perhaps be more beneficial going directly to the schools? Some say that the boards use up a sizeable allocation of public money that could perhaps be utilised in a different and more effective way.

345

Mr Martin: That has been a common criticism. I invite anyone on any of the boards to look carefully at how the money is used. I also invite any member of the Committee to come and spend a day or two going through our budget, seeing how the money is being utilised and determining whether it is being used effectively. You would of course expect me to say this, but I will say it anyway - I am convinced that it is being utilised effectively and in the best interests of schools. I am also convinced that if you were to try and work out another system, you would find that it would cost at least as much and probably more. That is always the case.

346

I invite anyone to scrutinise any of our activities. You will always find faults in any human organisation; I do not claim that we are perfect, but money is used effectively. When we have looked at the possibility of making savings, we had very few pots in which we could find anything. I admit that in relation to the delegation of budgets to schools, we could easily find two pots of money. We could delegate swimming out to schools, which they would not want; that costs about £250,000. We could also do something about the provision of youth tutors to schools, which cost about £500,000. That totals £750,000. That could be done, but it would not improve services for anyone. It is a book transfer.

347

The Chairperson: This is the last question. Thank you for a useful discussion. As presently constituted, are these proposals likely to create a schools system which enlists the boards, the principals and the teachers, to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs? Are they likely to create a fair and transparent system that is simple to operate and easy to understand? Do you have a one-word answer to that?

348

Mr Martin: On balance, I have a one-word answer, and it must be "no".

349

That sounds negative, and I do not mean it in that way. More money can be pumped into schools' budgets directly, but if they are not given the services that they need - transport, special needs, et cetera - then the approach does not represent a balanced way forward that will be in the best interests of the learning experience in schools.

350

Mr K Robinson: I apologise for being late. I want to ask Mr Martin one simple question. I apologise to both the gentlemen because their submissions are always worth listening to.

351

Why are we protecting the aims of LMS, rather than addressing the children's needs? We are spending an inordinate amount of time tinkering around with the system when we all know, and it is obvious from every delegation that comes to visit us, that the schools system is failing our children. We do not seem to be addressing the central question.

352

Mr Martin: That is an important question and one for the Committee to answer. It is very important that schools have as much autonomy as possible, but it is equally important that the funding mechanism that addresses that will meet the real needs of children. I question the proposition that schools are failing our pupils. However, there is always room for improvement, and that needs to be looked at carefully in the context of the curriculum review.

353

Mr Robinson: Thank you for that very politic answer. I appreciate it.

354

The Chairperson: Thank you very much. Due to administrative problems only half of the presentation to the Department was copied to Members, and I apologise for that. The full presentation will be made available for Member's consideration.

Thursday 27 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Fee
Mr Gallagher
Mr Hamilton
Ms Lewsley
Mr McElduff
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:

Mr Topping ) North Eastern
Mr McCurdy ) Education and
Mr Lynn ) Library Board

355

The Chairperson: Good morning. On behalf of the Education Committee, I welcome the representatives from the North Eastern Education and Library Board.

356

Mr Topping: Thank you. This is a very important issue. We are happy to be here to give our views on how we should be funding schools.

357

I will begin with contextual issues. We are working in an education system dictated by the policies of the Conservative party in the 1980s. The system is organised along the lines of a social market. Policies such as open enrolment or home-to-school transport contribute to this, as does local management of schools (LMS). Markets, to a great degree, create winners and losers. Everyone should be a winner in the education system: there should be no losers.

358

We are strong supporters of delegation. We believe that those who make the spending choices should have the responsibility of making the spending decisions. However, they should also know the cost of those decisions, and holding the budget should enable them to make rational decisions.

359

Finance is a tool to deliver policies. The key policy objective at present is to raise levels of achievement for all. There must be fair and equitable allocation of financial resources for this to be realised. We must address underachievement. The current system could be accused of funding failure. Schools have a core budget, but often additional resources are given to schools that are failing. We do not reward success. Our view is that financial allocation policies should not only support the raising of achievement and address those areas where there is deprivation, but reward successful schools. If not, the implication will be that successful schools cannot continue to be successful, and we will be funding mediocrity.

360

Another issue that concerns us is the definition of "commonality". On page 5 of its consultation document, the Department suggests that the policy objective is to ensure that schools in similar circumstances receive similar levels of funding, regardless of the area or sector in which they are located. That is a laudable objective. Commonality is defined in the document as "equitable inputs". We are concerned that equitable inputs do not mean equitable purchasing power, particularly in relation to the cost of teachers. Our view is that we need to address teacher costs, which make up around 80% of the budget. If we address this area we can resolve some of these problems.

361

There is a tension between local autonomy and central control, and there is reduced flexibility at local level. Reduction of local autonomy and the failure of the present formula are addressed by allocating earmarked funding. We have instances when core funding through LMS is insufficient to allow schools to create good class sizes at Key Stage 1. We then allocate extra money. There is an issue there regarding commonality.

362

Mr McCurdy: The Committee has the details of these issues in our submission, but I want to elaborate on them. First, the implications for board services and resources. In seeking to achieve the Department's recommendation of a high aggregated schools budget (ASB) - the maximisation of delegation of resources to schools - it has been suggested that an additional £15 million will be required. The board supports delegation of resources to schools, and has consistently made it a priority in its own area. The suggestion that the majority of this £15 million may be found within existing board budgets is unrealistic and fails to appreciate the implications for existing board services.

363

Of that £15 million, it has been suggested that our board find £4 million from its services. That equates to our entire curriculum advisory service. It equates to our entire psychology and youth service. It equates to the provision of free meals to all those people in our board area who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. That is the scale of what we are being asked to do.

364

In recent years we have seen significant additional resources being made available through various educational initiatives, although core funding for education has been reduced, affecting class sizes and classroom support. Regarding commonality and the level of inputs, if we continue with these initiatives certain schools will receive funds that others do not. That will compromise the principle of commonality.

365

Regarding the present focus on raising achievement, we argue that research has shown that large-scale improvement in education systems can only occur through essential outside support such as that which boards presently provide, particularly through our Curriculum Advisory and Support Service (CASS). Such support eases the managerial burden on governors and principals and assists the Government in achieving improvement in educational outcomes. The boards' present support services also enable local solutions to be found to local issues. Commonality would erode that local dimension because of its particular requirements in the context.

366

The second issue we identified was teachers' salaries. Supporting our earlier representation, the board is not suggesting the removal of teachers' salaries from the delegated budget, but rather seeking to minimise - if not, indeed, eliminate - the disparities in the purchasing power of that resource delegated to individual schools. By funding the true cost of a cohort of teachers for defined enrolment, greater equality of education opportunity and experience would be ensured for all pupils while also promoting local managerial discretion regarding the balance of delegated LMS funds.

367

The final issue is targeting social need (TSN). Over 5% of block grant resources - more than £40 million - is distributed between the boards on the basis of free school meals entitlement, which is the proxy for TSN. We feel very strongly that the impact of the policy should be evaluated before even more money is redirected. We understand that our schools would gain under commonality, since they currently suffer what we would term a "double whammy". We receive a small percentage of TSN moneys, since we have a low proportion of the Province's free school meals entitlement. When we fund schools, we therefore have fewer resources to begin with. In turn, we skew money towards those schools that have pupils with a free meal entitlement. The more pupils entitled to free meals, the more resources the school receives, but it occurs at the expense of those schools with fewer pupils entitled.

368

Before we support additional resources for TSN, with whose principles we agree, we should ask for evidence to demonstrate the impact the policy has had on tackling educational underachievement in the nine or 10 years over which it has been operating. We argue strongly that such resources should be targeted with clear planned outcomes, and that evaluation should be ongoing, with appropriate monitoring of progress towards those outcomes.

369

Ms Lewsley: On the issue of school meals and assessing special educational needs, some of us here have felt that entitlement to free school meals is an unfair indicator. What does your board see as a better option to identify need? Is the 0·5% increase we have sufficient? What could it achieve?

370

Mr McCurdy: In respect of the 0·5% increase, we are looking for evidence to support the outcomes - the delivery of TSN. We believe that it is a matter of raising educational achievement. The document's proposals therefore seek to recognise educational need in the post-primary sector by using Key Stage 2 results at the end of primary schooling and targeting resources accordingly. We would welcome greater targeting. The difficulty is in defining the balance between social deprivation factors and educational need. That movement towards focusing on educational outcomes is welcome, for we believe TSN is about educational underachievement. We are not sure whether the results of the Key Stage 2 tests are currently available for such use.

371

The primary sector, however, is different, for there is no baseline testing when pupils come in to the system. It may be possible to utilise Key Stage 1 results, but the question of who would benefit comes under the school's remit, so their independence would have to be considered. As a board we are conscious that entitlement to free school meals has been a proxy, and evidence and research show it to be the best one available. However, the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency has other indicators of social deprivation that could be brought together in some way with TSN.

372

Mr S Wilson: I have a couple of questions. First of all, you mentioned that funding should reward successful schools, and we all agree with that. However, if they are successful they will attract more pupils, and thus have more income due to the operation of the age-weighted pupil unit (AWPU). In that sense, are they not awarded extra finds already?

373

Secondly, I cannot understand this argument. If schools are given actual teacher costs, the money is not removed from the delegated budget. Surely if those costs are to be funded for schools, they will have to be told that they can only employ so many teachers. Otherwise, how would you estimate actual teacher costs? They will have a certain number of posts, so schools lose flexibility on the number of teaching posts they have available. Are you not loath to give away that delegation? Where does flexibility come in for a school?

374

I take it that you do not mean that if the school has been allocated six teachers and decides that it wants an additional one, it will have to sacrifice something for the seventh. By not funding that extra teacher, in effect you are taking flexibility from the school. I would be interested to hear how you marry those two things. You say actual teacher costs should be funded, but on the other hand you will not lay down the law to the school regarding how many teachers it is allowed.

375

Mr Topping: I will address the second question first. This is a work in progress as far as we are concerned. The principle is a good idea, and it is the right approach for a number of reasons. The first is that it reduces bureaucracy in schools.

376

It creates stability, and that is important. For example, schools will know how many teachers they are entitled to if we allocate them on the basis of bands of pupils. They will know that when their enrolment drops, they are likely to lose a teacher. Under this kind of system we intend to fund the schools for the actual cost of their teachers. They will then be able to plan on the basis of that knowledge.

377

That stability will allow long-term planning and allow schools to establish class sizes. It deals with a lot of problems that are mentioned in the document, such as predicting enrolments, which is anything but an exact science. Those are the principles behind it.

378

Regarding flexibility, we will delegate money to the schools to pay for the total number of teachers. Schools can then decide whether they want a member of staff less, or one more, because the teacher costs will not be the entire LMS delegated budget. There will be other costs: they could sacrifice one year's materials or a minor work or maintenance project in order to purchase another teacher. That is where they have flexibility. The schools will know that they have an entitlement that is paid for, and the problem is that at present they do not know that.

379

It would solve the problem of average teacher costs. Mr McCurdy will explain this in more detail, but in our area average teacher costs are higher than the Northern Ireland average. Our problem is that we are purchasing less for the amount of money we are given, because of the teacher costs.

380

Mr S Wilson: If you allocate a certain amount of money to a school and the school decides that a senior member of staff - someone who has been there for a long time - is to be made redundant and replaced by a younger teacher, the school might be able to employ a classroom assistant as well. It would cost the school less to employ a younger teacher. Under the present system, that decision saves money. Under actual costs the cost of that teacher is £20,000 instead of £35,000, and therefore that is all the school receives. Where is the flexibility?

381

Mr Topping: The flexibility exists in the other costs - for example, a teacher may be funded instead of a maintenance project.

382

Mr S Wilson: The cost of a school maintenance project is unlikely to pay for a teacher.

383

Mr Topping: It depends on the size of the school. It could be a part-time teacher. There are several options open to a school. For example, a school may have an allocation of six teachers, but the board of governors can decide to employ only five. We believe that allocating a budget on the basis of pupil numbers is flawed, so we allocate a budget according to a school's requirements.

384

We need to look at the winners and losers, rewarding success and not funding failure all the time. The present system funds failure more than it rewards success. We should develop a system that rewards success. According to some, more pupils equals more success, but there is a limit to that. Many of our most successful schools are full.

385

Mr McHugh: There is a stigma attached to free school meals. How big would the impact be on budgets if all the pupils who were entitled to free school meals came forward? Is the proposed 0·5% increase for TSN adequate to fulfil present or future needs?

386

Mr McCurdy: There are two aspects to consider. One of them is the additional 0·5% already referred to. We focus on the outcome of the resources that are allocated, and TSN is not targeted at the moment. A school's allowance is based on the number of pupils with free school meal entitlement, and we do not know whether or not that is correct. That money is part of the general formula, and therefore it is skewed in that particular way. Before we expand the resources that go into TSN we need to investigate the impact.

387

Secondly, our board is conscious that it has the lowest free school meal entitlement in proportion to the population in Northern Ireland. At present approximately 16% of our pupils are entitled to free school meals, and we have encouraged them to take up their entitlement so that boards can maximise resources under the assessment of relative needs formula.

388

We do not know how many pupils in Northern Ireland do not take up their entitlement and what impact that has on schools. Under the present formula it is estimated at approximately £300 to £350 per school per pupil. There is a finite resource, so if that proportion jumped from 16% to 20%, that resource would not be lost through that aspect of the formula.

389

Mr McElduff: You appear to be minimalist or begrudging about even the principle of TSN, though you are at pains to say that you are not. I would have liked to see an increase beyond 5·5%, but obviously you would like to see it reduced.

390

Mr McCurdy: I do not want it reduced at this time. We are looking for evidence. Targeting social need (TSN) has been operational for 10 years. The board has only 16% of the TSN proportion, which means we lose about £4 million per year. Over 10 years, that comes to £40 million that might otherwise have gone into schools in our area, that has been redistributed across Northern Ireland to boards with a higher TSN proportion. Evidence from our area shows that 50% of our schools are currently in deficit. Those two factors are not unrelated. The board is not opposed to promoting TSN, but it is looking for greater evidence on the impact of TSN and whether it is being effectively targeted and monitored.

391

Mr Topping: That is a very important point. I do not want to give the impression that the board is against raising achievement and addressing low achievement and underachievement where those occur - the board is for that. However, the board is doubtful that this particular system can achieve the aims that the board wants to achieve. Throwing more money at the system will not necessarily solve the problem.

392

Mr Hamilton: Do you agree that when the costs of teachers' salaries and other items delegated under LMS are considered, schools have very little flexibility? Electricity bills, for example, must be paid. It only takes one thing to go wrong - a hike in oil prices, for example - for everything in a school to be put out of kilter. I remember instances like that happening when I was a teacher.

393

You mentioned that materials could be cut back. When I was a teacher I did some purchasing under LMS. The school did not buy anything that it did not need. It was already cut back to the bone. To cut back on materials, for example, would cut back on things that children need in order to get the type of education that they are meant to get. Do you not feel that schools have very little room for manoeuvre under LMS?

394

Mr Topping: We can talk in generalities or specifics. The generality is that across Northern Ireland, and in our area in particular, 80% of the budget goes on teacher costs. That leaves 20%. There is flexibility within that 80%, as I described to Mr Wilson, or with the remaining 20%. However, that is not the case in every school. In many schools in our area, as Mr McCurdy said, almost 100% of the budget is taken up with teacher costs. Under this proposal, the board is not, in any way, reducing the flexibility that is available to schools. Indeed, the board is stabilising it, addressing a number of situations and reducing bureaucracy, yet still maintaining the current flexibility of schools.

395

The Chairperson: Are these proposals, as presently constituted, likely to create a school system that assists boards, principals and teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs? Are the proposals likely to create a fair and transparent system that is easy to operate and simple to understand? Can you give a one-word answer to that?

396

Mr Topping: If we were forced to give a one-word answer, it would be "No". This system will not solve the problems of our particular board. We want to see a funding system that is obviously transparent and understandable. The vast majority of people who were consulted on the discussion paper did not understand it because it was so complex. We want a simple, understandable and transparent system, but it must also target the right issues in the education system. The system must adequately resource schools and also effectively address the needs of the system.

397

Mr K Robinson: I want to declare an interest as a school governor in the North Eastern Education and Library Board area and to have the Clerk note that I took no part in the debate.

398

Mr Topping: With the ongoing reviews on the curriculum and post-primary education, is this the right time to look at this issue? The outcomes of those reviews will impact on the funding of schools.

399

The Chairperson: Thank you.

Thursday 27 September 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Gallagher
Mr Hamilton
Mr McElduff
Mr McHugh

Witnesses:
Mr M Wardlow )
Mr A Sheeran ) Northern Ireland Council
Mr A Dolan ) for Integrated Education
Ms O Frost )

400

The Chairperson: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the public evidence session of the Education Committee. We have only limited time for a presentation. Members will be given the opportunity to ask questions.

401

We heard last week from a representative of the primary sector, so we will be interested to hear the comments of Mr Dolan, who is the principal of a secondary integrated college.

402

Mr Wardlow: By way of introduction, I will speak on the subject in a general way. Mr Sheeran will then detail the three key points, covering the general elements of the document, and Mr Dolan will address the more specific points, including evidence concerning the second-level principle. Ms Frost, the principal of Oakwood Integrated Primary School, will address members' questions and any additional issues that she might want to contribute. Both Mr Dolan and Ms Frost are founding principals of grant-maintained integrated schools, so they have ample experience in the field.

403

Along with the Chairperson, the Deputy Chairperson, the Minister, the Department, and colleagues from the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) and the Governing Bodies Association (GBA), I have had the opportunity to address issues which, as regional bodies, we felt should be heard. I will not rehearse those points. Also, one of our representatives had the chance to attend last week's presentation by the primary school principals. Although we are disappointed that we will not be represented at next week's meeting of secondary principals, we appreciate the fact that we have been allowed to make our presentation today. We hope that our presentation will not be too disjointed; we will be covering some general issues before picking up on more specific matters.

404

Our response is made in the context of an overall change in regard to the curriculum and reviews of administration and of the transfer test - in a few weeks' time, after holding our breath on that matter, we should find out what is happening. We are aware that local management of schools (LMS) forms only one component of that. We are also aware that if we simply look at one piece of the jigsaw we will not see the overall picture. We want to deal with LMS in the knowledge that there is an overall context of change and movement. We in the integrated sector, who have long been promoting change, welcome these developments.

405

It must be recognised that LMS cannot be divorced from the bigger picture. From day one, we have welcomed the recognition of the need for a common formula. The council made one of the earliest responses to the Department; it said that for too long there has been a lack of transparency and a misunderstanding, and very often that reflects on the integrated education sector.

406

We also welcome the extension of the consultation period, because we felt that the original timescale was too tight. We appreciate the fact that we have a devolved Government and representatives such as yourselves who can listen not only to administrative officials but to teachers, such as Ms Frost and Mr Dolan, who are involved in the delivery of the service at the coalface.

407

The Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE) represents 47 schools and, now, almost 5% of the school-going population. We are a growing sector. We stand firmly by the fact that LMS has contributed to that growth and to our ability to target resources. We are therefore strong advocates of that system, and we now have a key role in its recreation.

408

We are against anything that would diminish the authority of schools, their boards of governors and key senior management officials to take decisions to allocate resources where they are needed. From the beginning, LMS has allowed schools to do that. Under the system, teacher-pupil ratios have increased. We have seen a raft of changes take place. We would therefore be opposed to any move that would remove teachers' salaries from the budget. The LMS system involves the delegation of the whole budget, rather than part of it.

409

When we discuss the specific details of our document you will hear that schools in the integrated sector are, because of their nature, responsible for a range of matters. We argue that those responsibilities are not reflected in the current proposals. We will, therefore, be outlining specific points that we would like the Committee to consider in any new formula. We recognise that there is a finite limit on resources and that money needs to be targeted at the early-years levels, but we do not want that to happen at the cost of other areas. That would be comparable to the squeezing of a tube of toothpaste. Needs exist and we ask the Committee to ensure that additional resources are allocated to the sector. For example, we do not believe that the cost of educating a child in any sector has ever been worked out accurately. We have worked up from a given figure; even the current suggestion was based on something that existed in the past.

410

Although, in the end, there may well be winners and losers, we want the best case to be made for the education of the children. That money needs to be put in to the system; that also relieves you of taking hard decisions. There are other creative ways to address LMS, for example through the Curriculum Advisory and Support Service (CASS) system of centrally held funding and targeting social need (TSN) - we have used those means. As we say in our submission, the council is a strong advocate of having a central funding agency. It would prefer to take over that responsibility, rather than have it devolved across five boards.

411

Mr Sheeran: There are three elements to NICIE's response - the age-weighted pupil units (AWPUs); administration and other costs unique to grant-maintained integrated (GMI) schools; and implementation of transitional funding arrangements.

412

Due to AWPUs, a significant reduction for integrated schools is proposed. That will put a significant strain on existing budgets. The main reason for the present differential is that GMI schools have had little opportunity to benefit from education and library board expenditure. There have been ways in which schools have developed relationships with boards, but that does not provide the assistance that a controlled school has.

413

NICIE believes that there may be exceptional circumstances when pupil numbers are not the appropriate attractor for funding. That is particularly the case when a school is in growth and it incurs non-pupil-related costs. NICIE also asks for clarification on the contingency arrangements for mid-year claims. Integrated schools are expanding and there can be instances when many new pupils arrive during the year. At present the Department will not review a school's funding arrangements until 10% of the school population comes new to the school. NICIE believes that that should be set at 5%.

414

AWPUs should be set by the Department of Education and should not fluctuate. They have fluctuated three times in the past year, and that does not assist schools when they are attempting to budget. There should be a greater emphasis towards years 8 to 12. Skewing towards 8 to 12 will enhance the impact of TSN attainment among underachievers.

415

The administration and other costs incurred by grammar schools and grant-maintained integrated schools is an area where NICIE feels that one has to recognise the status of GMI schools. We spent a lot of time trying to agree figures on those. However, it is impossible to present a mutually agreeable figure because school budgets are very different and they are accounted for in different ways across the sector.

416

School governors can avail of virement across budget headings so that funding that is appropriated for one issue may or may not be spent on that issue. The regular acquisition of slippage moneys means that a large amount of money may come in at the end of the year and be spent, but is not directly related to the annual budget.

417

Many schools will have assigned salary costs to pieces of work that they have to do as GMI schools, and NICIE finds it difficult to separate that money. In other words, if someone is working on budgets or advertising for staff, it is difficult to separate the amounts spent. An in-depth look must be taken at that. NICIE suggests looking at VAT, audit costs, administration costs, insurance, legal advice, finance, bursar costs, payroll, purchasing and banking automated credit system (BACS) costs. NICIE was able to look at those and suggest figures related to them. However, it was still unable to come up with final average costs on legal status, the administration costs associated with that and the employment responsibilities that GMI schools have. Our proposed costs are greater than those of the Department. Our figures show the general pattern for GMI schools, and we believe that a formula should be devised to cover those costs.

418

GMI schools are required to pay VAT. We believe that the proposed inclusion of VAT in the premises factor is problematic. A set level of VAT could effectively cap schools' annual expenditures. That issue must be clarified. GMI schools should not have to pay VAT. They are educational charities, but, in accordance with present charitable law, charities must pay VAT - although that may be reconsidered, as the Performance and Innovation Unit of the Cabinet Office is examining the issue of charitable status. Therefore, NICIE does not accept the Department's apportionment of costs for this factor, and we will request that the Department and the Committee discuss the issue with the centre and ourselves.

419

We support the need for a common formula for transitional funding arrangements. It is only fair that all schools should have their costs met. However, if there are to be substantial losses in our sector then transitional arrangements must be put in place to cushion the inevitable impact. The Department has suggested a cushioning impact of no more than 2% a year. For GMI second-level colleges, the Department suggests that the total loss to the annual budget will be 2·3% - that can work out at about £65,000 a year. We have a problem with that. If there are to be losses over a three-year period, then those losses should be tapered off at a rate of 33%, so that there will be a gradual decrease rather than the sudden drop which the Department seems to favour.

420

Mr Wardlow: We found it extremely difficult to establish actual figures on which to base our projected budgets. All our schools worked on an indicative basis. A mistake had already been made that suggested that integrated schools were being over-funded to the tune of 35%. That was withdrawn, but when the Department issued new figures they were not circulated as much as the previous set. As a result, we are still reaping the whirlwind of people claiming that we are 35% over-funded, when in fact our funding will - even by the Department's figures - have been significantly reduced. Our figures are indicative of what we think might happen, but the Committee will appreciate that it has been difficult to get actual figures

421

Mr Dolan: I am the principal of a grant-maintained integrated school in Dungannon. We currently have an enrolment of 452, and it is the start of our seventh year. Dungannon is a fairly rural market town and, like many other schools, has a wide catchment area including Portadown, Richhill in Armagh, Aughnacloy, Clogher, Ballygawley, Pomeroy, Carrickmore, Cookstown, Coagh, and the Lough Neagh area.

422

The Chairperson: That is quite a bus run.

423

Mr Dolan: Parents in this wide catchment area have the option of integrated education for their children. We cater for pupils of all abilities. The selection is largely based on a lottery system - as a result of the situation last year, we can no longer use pre-enrolment forms, which brought some degree of fairness to the system.

424

We have the full academic range of children: those who got "A" at transfer, and those who did not do the transfer examination. We are in our second year of GCSE results. Those results have been good, and have been substantially higher than other non-selective schools in Northern Ireland.

425

One of the key features of our school is the extensive range of extra-curricular activity. The school opens at 8.20 am and closes at 4.40 pm, Monday to Friday. At weekends we have the Duke of Edinburgh's Award and sport. We run two summer schools each year, and the funding issues for that programme have not been taken into account. We have to approach the lottery, through the New Opportunities Fund, for funding. Extra-curricular activities should be funded as part of our educational system.

426

My experience of operating the current system is quite limited. However, the support that we have received from the School Policy and Planning Branch in the Department of Education has been first class, both in documentation and telephone conversations.

427

The financial planning horizon is tight. In some ways there is no horizon. We are given our budget in April for the financial year running from the beginning of April to the end of the following March. That creates considerable difficulties as it fluctuates yearly, depending on the allocations of money to education and the integrated sector within it. It does not allow us to plan properly, and that is something we need to look at. We must be able to plan adequately for the future.

428

Accountability is very complicated and I cannot understand it. There is an accountability requirement. My emphasis is that I am a head teacher working every day with children. At other times I am supposed to work as an accountant or a financial whizz-kid. I accept the need for accountability, but it is very onerous. There has been good documentation from the Department: a financial memorandum on the amount of accountability that we should have in place.

429

There is the level of special educational needs in an integrated school. In our intake this year we had 47% Catholic, 43% Protestant, and 10% others. That masks a lot more about integration. We take all abilities and are willing to integrate into our schools children with disabilities. In my school we have 28 children who are statemented. About 6% of the population have actual statements, and a considerably greater number have learning needs that are not recognised by statement, but are in the process - either stage one or stage two. When the children reach stage five they get an actual statement. That is not adequately taken into account in the current arrangements.

430

The special educational needs children will have a statement. The Department provides, where appropriate, classroom assistants, et cetera, and we receive funding for that. If any of you are familiar with the statementing process, you will know that it is very individual and requires a lot of resources and administration in a school. There is no allocation of funding for that. There is an allocation to the children for their educational needs, but not for the school to run regular reviews or annual reviews - all statutory requirements that need to be considered.

431

You asked me to suggest modifications to the formula and arrangements for the future. A lot of these points have been made. I accept that a common formula would be fair, and I have no difficulty with that. One of the suggestions in the document from the Department was that it should be transparent. What is being proposed is not transparent. There is no formula in the document: it is called a common funding formula, but can any of you show me the page with the formula on it? It is not there - perhaps deliberately, so that we cannot calculate the effects on our schools. If it were going to be transparent, I would like to see a formula.

432

Secondly, even when we do get to see it, it is not going to be easy for schools to operate. On page 60 there is a regression line to indicate the relationship between free school meals and social deprivation. That is not something that is going to be easily calculated in a school.

433

There could be simpler ways of ensuring that there are higher levels of funding for greater levels of social deprivation. For example, under the sports factor it is more transparent. The proposal is that the bigger the school, the more money it gets for football pitches. We can make it just as simple for the social deprivation factor.

434

I want to be able to plan three years ahead. That requires me to know the formula, to have an idea of the AWPU and to know the weightings. Then I will know the figures that are going to be in the school, and I can calculate and predict whether I will have more staff or redundant staff, et cetera. That is not a potential at the moment, and I am not convinced it is in this document either.

435

I have a few lesser points. The formula refers to the 10% growth that is needed to trigger a recalculation in September or October. That is too high. Ten per cent of my enrolment would be 45 pupils. We have much growth in integrated schools. If you get 25 or 30 additional children into a school, another teacher may be needed. That 10% trigger would not allow me to do that. We should reduce that; our suggestion is that the figure should be 5%. At one stage it was 7·5%.

436

The weightings have been shifted toward primary schools. As a secondary level teacher, I have no difficulty in agreeing with that. I know the needs in the primary schools, but a skewing toward A level has also been introduced. Look at the way it has been averaged on the weightings: there is a slight skewing toward A level and away from Key Stage 4. The current balance is right. There should be additional funding for A levels, but to skew it further toward A levels might be too far.

437

I have a few final points to make. It is vital that we retain control of teacher salaries in schools, or else local management of schools (LMS) is dead; we would not have an LMS system in our schools. Eighty per cent of my budget is spent on teacher salaries, and 90% of the budget is spent on total salaries. To take that element out of the budget would not leave us the freedom to make local decisions. That is a crucial way forward; the decisions must be made at local level, right at the point of delivery of the service. My governors, my senior staff and I know what is needed. We must have the resources, and the freedom to allocate them in a climate of strict accountability, inspection and financial accountability. I accept that point.

438

The £93·75 being allocated for the special factors of voluntary grammar and integrated schools is inadequate in my school. I have calculated that it costs about £130 for the additional insurance, VAT, administration and personnel services that we pay for, but that the boards provide for other schools.

439

I want to make a point about the boards' Curriculum Advisory and Support Services (CASS). While it provides an excellent service for training in schools, I would add it to my list of things to be delegated to schools. We in the schools should be in control of our staff development budget. It is currently run externally. For example, if I send a teacher on a CASS course, I will get a substitute teacher paid for. If I send the same teacher on a course of our choosing, it is not funded.

440

It skews the whole towards going to the CASS course, because there is not a big cost to the school, but it might not be the appropriate training. We are not in control of the training. The staff development needs in schools are huge and need to be addressed in schools. We know them ourselves, and while CASS does look at us each year and ask us what we want, it is also looking at hundreds of other schools in the Southern Board area. It all gets averaged out.

441

Finally, the idea of funding by the education and library boards, with each chief officer being the accounting officer for all schools in that particular area, does not make sense for integrated schools. There are three or four integrated schools in the Southern Board area, and hundreds of other small primary schools. The amount of time that the Board could give to ensure that we were being treated fairly and correctly would be very little.

442

I want to endorse the idea of a central funding agency or one lead board to control the funding of our schools, and not have it in the hands of five different accounting officers, where we would have to account to five different sets of rules. That would be a horrendous job for NICIE to have to deal with.

443

The Chairperson: I know that you did not mean to imply that the chief officers of boards were ignoring you. There is an understanding that chief officers act in the best interests of all the children and all the schools. Proportionately, it is fair to say that the integrated sector, being a smaller sector, will receive less attention, but not in the application of policy.

444

Are you in favour of the payment of average teaching costs or actual costs?

445

Mr Dolan: If it is a fully delegated budget, then the total funding going into the school would be for the school to pay the teacher's salaries, staff the school and promote within it. That is an average, where the Department judges how much money is needed to pay salaries. They would not be taking account of the individual circumstances of a school.

446

The Chairperson: That is not just your personal view?

447

Mr Wardlow: No, that is NICIE's view. The quota system, where someone tells us the number of teachers we can have, does not take account of growth in class size. What LMS allows us to do, in the light of the growth of new schools, is to get a lot of young, eager teachers to come in and work hard. It allows our governing body, and the principal teachers and senior management, to allocate that money to where it is needed, to reduce class size and to get that passion at classroom level.

448

Mr Gallagher: I want to pick up on the type of arrangement you would prefer for getting advice and support. If you were not getting it from CASS, where would you get it? Are there other bodies that are strong enough to respond to your contractual needs?

449

Secondly, on the subject of school transport, though you favour greater delegation of funds to schools, I understand that you would prefer transport to be retained centrally. The difficulty of these arrangements is that the more that is delegated to schools, the less there will be for transport. Would you like to see the present school transport arrangements shrinking, or at least maintained, with some additional money available to protect them?

450

Mr Wardlow: My two colleagues who work in schools are best placed to talk about the buying-in of CASS services.

451

Ms Frost: There are a number of alternatives to CASS that can provide training. There is the Regional Training Unit (RTU), and there are agencies associated with particular problems such as autism. There has been a huge increase in the number of children on the autistic spectrum coming into primary schools. While medical agencies might say that there are no links to one thing or another, there are concerns about that.

452

At the moment I have the choice of taking a two-day course through CASS or buying a day with an agency supported by the National Autistic Society. I have taken the latter option, because the cost of having my teacher out of the school is smaller in that case.

453

Mr Dolan made the point that there are a large number of schools, and everybody puts their own interest in the pot. In my case, I have a small, new school, and we are trying to set ourselves up as a learning environment for teachers as well as pupils. We feel that that is the way forward.

454

I have been trying for three years to become part of the literacy improvement CASS training, and have only this year succeeded. In the meantime, I feel that as an individual I have had to bring my staff on myself. In fact, we think that we are now ahead of what CASS is offering. I do not know if you can appreciate what I am saying, but last year one of my teachers became part of disseminating good practice in literacy within the board as a result of the work that we are doing in the school without CASS.

455

CASS certainly has a lot of good things to offer, but there are other ways of training staff. If schools had a delegated budget for that, we could make better use of it.

456

Mr Dolan: I do not want to give the impression that we are here to knock CASS or the people who are in it. They are excellent. It is about the way in which we access the service. At the moment it is just there and it is imposed on us. We take it, or we get nothing. I suggest that if schools had control of that budget, I would still be buying from CASS, but it would be a different relationship, rather than it being the master.

457

Mr Wardlow: For a number of years we have been arguing with the Department that there is a training role for consolidating what we call the "integrated ethos". Whether we like it or not, that type of experience is not resident in CASS at the moment. We buy in, for example, Mediation Network community relations training. Helping teachers deal with integration in practice is part of staff development. Two reports that are about to be released have identified ongoing staff development as a need. Even external folk coming in are saying that to run a monopoly, even if that monopoly is very good, does not allow choice to remain.

458

With regard to transport, the price we pay for a pluralist system of education is that there is, in some people's view, duplication. People are asking how an integrated school in Dungannon can afford to bus children in from the border areas. The problem is that there is no integrated school serving that area. There are 17 integrated colleges serving the six counties in Northern Ireland, so we do not have an integrated school available within two or three miles for every parent.

459

The sector grew 8% last year, despite a downturn in the overall school population. We still turned away one in four of the children who applied to our schools - over 800 children this year - despite taking 1,000 more in. There is continued growth in demand for integrated schools. We are trying to balance that by opening new schools in areas where there is parental demand. That would reduce some of the issues, because kids would be travelling to somewhere closer. However, as long as we have a system that is not "the neighbourhood school", we are going to have this system of busing. Whether that is best funded by the school or centrally is an issue for further debate. I suspect that there is no consensus on that.

460

The Chairperson: I am conscious of time. A couple of members have questions to ask, so please be brief.

461

Mr S Wilson: I have a number of questions. There is a perception that the integrated sector is over-funded, whether is it 35% or a lower figure. Can you tell us how much the Department is now saying that you are over-funded in its revised figures?

462

Secondly, you say that the reduction in the AWPU is going to disadvantage you. Currently the difference is about £200 per pupil. Your argument is that that is because there are many ways in which the boards do not support integrated education. However, as we have just seen, there are cases in which you actually volunteer not to have the use of services. You cannot complain - or can you? - that you do not get services from the boards, while on the other hand saying that when they are offered to you, you do not take them up. Is that a basis for then saying that you should have a fairly generous difference of £200 per pupil? Are there any services that the boards actually deny you that would explain why there should be that difference?

463

Thirdly, I want to question your figures. You gave some examples of extra administrative costs. I notice that you have included VAT. However, VAT actually comes under another element. You get 33% of your school maintenance to cover that. According to my calculation, if you took out the VAT that is covered separately, the money that is available under administration for grammar schools and grant-maintained integrated schools - your £130 per pupil - would be reduced to £80. That would keep you within the level of £93·75. Why did you include VAT when it is a separate element? Does it not distort the figure?

464

Lastly, on the issue of transport -

465

The Chairperson: Quickly, please.

466

Mr S Wilson: This is one way in which you are generously treated in relation to other schools. I would like your comment on it. It might be one of the reasons why you do not want transport delegated. One of the reasons why there has been such a growth in integrated schools is that youngsters who would not qualify for transport to a controlled or maintained school, for example, will qualify for transport to an integrated school. That may well be a factor influencing parents in making their decision as to whether to send youngsters to integrated schools. Furthermore, it adds considerably to the budgets of the boards.

467

Mr Wardlow: As regards the transport issue, what we are dealing with here is anecdotal evidence. In my seven years here, probably two parents have honestly said to me that one of the reasons they are using integrated schools is that they get transport there. The main reason that we are finding is that it is the integrated school; it is not the fact that it happens to be three or more miles away. If there were some figures to back up what Mr Wilson says, we would look at them. We are not treated any better than any of the other designated units - Catholic maintained, voluntary grammar or Irish-medium. If there is no school within two or three miles, the same rule pertains to every sector.

468

There was an argument that some people go to integrated schools because they are co-educational. That may or may not be the case. The fact is that people choose to go to and remain in integrated schools. We are turning children away. Transport is one of the costs of maintaining a pluralist system.

469

The perception that we are over-funded - and the figure will drop by about £180 - comes across partly because people are looking in from the outside, and partly because of figures that are coming through. Leaving VAT to one side, we are now able to centrally purchase legal services, which were not available from the boards. We could not buy them from the boards. We now have them through the area boards' legal services at a reduced cost for the first year of £1,500 for a second-level college and £750 for a primary school. It took us a year to negotiate that. It does not include barristers' costs. That is a real cost, not a perception. That is one service that we could not buy and have now negotiated to buy.

470

It is not that we do not want the services, but we cannot actually access them. In human resources, for example, there is no-one at the board who is genned up on some of the idiosyncrasies of running grant-maintained schools. That is why we have to buy that training from outside. If we had enough money to buy the services, we are not saying that we would not go to the boards or to CASS or anyone else. What we are arguing for is to have those services provided by the people who know where that is best-placed, rather than having to follow along.

471

Mr S Wilson: Legal services and human resources do not account for £200 of a difference.

472

Mr Wardlow: With respect, there is a list of the differences in our submission. They include payroll, human resources, personnel, purchasing, audit and administration, all of which are at cost.

473

Mr Sheeran: The reason that we included VAT in that calculation is that we were trying to get all the costs that are incurred. We have a problem with the way that the Department has added VAT to premises, because it is not clear. There is a premises cost and there is an additional 14% for GMI costs on top, and we are not clear whether the VAT charge is 33% of 100% or 33% of 114%. At the minute we cannot actually work out how much each individual school can expect to get under that. That is why we are including it in those total figures and saying, "Let us look at the totality here. Let us actually work out something that actually meets those costs." At the minute we cannot work out those costs.

474

Mr Wardlow: It also works backwards. If we have a VAT amount of £100,000 or £50,000, that works backwards to allow us to have a certain amount of cash to dispose. It caps the spend, and therefore works backwards against the budget. At the minute, because of the budget allocations that are there, if we pay them and the VAT is available to do that, we do it. We cannot find out how much VAT is actually in there at the moment. Perhaps there is a simple answer. Maybe it is the 114% with 33% on top, but we have included it to show the actual costs of running a GMI school.

475

Mr S Wilson: You could have worked it out for the 100% or you could have worked it out for the 114%.

476

The Chairperson: I am keen to move on.

477

Mr McHugh: You have said that you agree with the extra 0·5% for TSN. Some school principals have told me that that would not even start to tackle that issue. What percentage increase do you think would be necessary to deal with that?

478

Ms Frost: I am not familiar with the figures. I do have views on TSN, but they might not answer your question.

479

Mr McHugh: If 5·5% is not going to do much to deal with the problem, what sort of percentage should we be talking about?

480

Ms Frost: I am not going to give percentages. The skewing of finance toward Key Stage 2 - ages 8 to 12 - would make a significant difference with regard to TSN difficulties in schools. TSN should be looked at, not at the endpoint of a primary school before the child goes to secondary school, but rather at the beginning, so that there is a realistic view of what these children know when they come to school that can indicate the social needs that they may have and the disadvantages that they have had before they come to school. In fact that is possible, and there is a system in place that can be used that is not the Department of Education system of baseline assessment. That would allow that to be discovered, and we could then have funding based on the reality of what a school is getting.

481

Of course, in any school there is a desire to give an excellent education. Integrated schools have to constantly prove that they are good schools. To say at the end of it all that you have had a group of children who came in at a certain level and you have brought them beyond an anticipated level - to lose funding based on that is quite wrong. There needs to be a new look at the kind of funding that primary schoolchildren have. That is the foundation of education. That in itself would make a difference to social needs policy.

482

Mr McElduff: I have a very specific query. I hope that it is relevant.

483

The Chairperson: I will be the judge of that.

484

Mr McElduff: Are children from ethnic minority backgrounds more or less likely to seek enrolment at integrated schools? If so, are there implications for resources, for training of teachers or whatever? There has been a relatively significant influx of Portuguese people in Dungannon recently. Has that had a knock-on effect?

485

Mr Dolan: There are already some Portuguese children at Windmill Integrated Primary School in Dungannon. By and large it is the male members of the family who are coming to work at Moy Park, so the children are not there in large numbers yet.

486

My own school has Hindu children and Baha'is. We defined 10% of our intake this year as "other". We are very tight on that, because our area is very predominantly Catholic. We want to maintain a balanced intake. We have roughly equal numbers - 47% to 43%. Some schools in the Belfast area would have up to 20% "other". We estimate that in our area we have something like 7% or 8%.

487

Mr Wardlow: Our general figures for last year were roughly 12% "other". We realise that there are people, perhaps from mixed marriages, who do not want to designate Protestant or Catholic. There is an issue about what "other" means, but we have been working with principals and senior managers to make sure that, as much as possible, "other" is not a catch-all for people who do not want to designate. We are getting increasing numbers of phone calls from people from other faith traditions.

488

A few months ago, the 'Belfast Telegraph' did quite a substantial coverage of a prayer room that was set up at Brownlow Integrated College for a young boy called Malachy Moustafa, who is a Muslim. You will find a significant number of other faith traditions at Cranmore Integrated Primary School.

489

Ms Frost: We do not have other faith traditions in terms of ethnic background. We do have people who wish to declare themselves as "other" and are quite determined that they will not designate a religious faith to their child. It is important that we recognise that we have atheists in Northern Ireland who genuinely want to be known as such.

490

Mr Wardlow: Obviously if we are doing religious education for the two major traditions and we are trying to encourage and celebrate difference instead of compartmentalising it, there is a major issue in trying to help those children grow in their own faith tradition and, more importantly, to help our kids see what the differences are, rather than stereotype or, worse, demonise, which is happening in the North at the moment.

491

Mr Hamilton: You said that a significant strain would be created on existing budgets. Is it not really the case that through special allowances, such as landlord allowances, that you are given, the integrated sector is quite generously treated compared to other sectors?

492

Mr Wardlow: There is a presupposition there that there is a catch-all figure of landlord costs that somehow picks it up. What we tried to do in our submission was to deal not in terms of perception, but rather in the real-time funding issues for us. From day one, our new-build schools are 30% brick and 70% mobiles. The footprint of those schools is huge; the corridor space is limited. The amount that we get to support a school of which 70% does not have a brick in it is not enough to maintain that school over 25 years.

493

It is too simple to say that the footprint of a school should dictate the moneys available. It is not the same for a brick-built school. From day one there are additional costs in running a school that is 70% mobiles, which all our schools since 1995 have been. They may be new schools, but they are not built in traditional style.

494

That is just one example. The landlord's cost is heating and lighting. We are not allowed to put oil-fired heating in most of these new schools; we have to fight to get that. It is electric heating, which is three times the price, and the heat disappears. There are additional issues.

495

The Chairperson: Time has beaten us. I have one final question, and I am hoping for a yes or no answer. Are these proposals, as presently constituted, likely to create a school system that assists the boards, principals and teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their need, and are they likely to create a fair and transparent system that is simple to operate and easy to understand?

496

Mr Sheeran: We would like it to be transparent, but we do not feel that it is at the moment. We are very much in favour of a common funding formula, which would open up the myths that there have been about integrated education. While we would support a common funding formula, there are elements of the proposal that we have problems with.

497

The Chairperson: Thank you very much.

Thursday 4 October 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Ms Lewsley
Mr McHugh

Witnesses:
Mr J Fitzsimons )
Mr S Sloan ) South Eastern Education
Mr K Brown ) and Library Board

498

The Chairperson: Good afternoon, Gentlemen, and welcome to this evidence session on the proposals for a common funding formula. We have already received your submission, and I invite you now to make a presentation based on that. We will then ask you some questions.

499

Mr Fitzsimons: Thank you very much for your welcome and for the opportunity to address the Education Committee. We welcome the examination of the funding of schools to ensure that there is equity of treatment among schools and children. We hope that the procedure eventually arrived at will be simple to administer.

500

There are three issues that we want to address. I will begin by identifying a substantive issue, which, if tackled, would be very helpful to schools and would have major ramifications for the local management of schools (LMS) system. Members will be aware that the LMS system was inherited from a local authority in England - the Cambridgeshire model was adapted for here. It was for a much larger system, with much larger schools. One of the key factors in any budget is staff cost. In this particular case, it is the cost of teachers. Members are probably aware that teacher costs account for 80% to 90% of the budget and that as teachers mature they cost more money. Our view is that the actual costs of a teacher's salary should be met centrally. Schools should employ a given number of teachers, and a pupil:teacher ratio should be established for primary and secondary schools. All children, therefore, would be entitled to the same teacher ratio.

501

A key factor in raising educational performance is the number of children that a teacher has to teach. Under the current system, and the system that is proposed, average teacher costs will be given to schools. A sliding scale will apply to schools employing up to 25 teachers. The majority of schools in the Province have fewer than 25 teachers. There is something wrong with a system, which is supposed to be equitable, giving 80% to 90% of the budget to schools but then having a sliding scale to adjust that. That certainly does not simplify the system.

502

We also have the situation where schools employ teachers, and boards of governors and principals try to manage that budget. There are some aspects of the budget that they can control and manage.

503

I presume that they employ the best teacher available to fill a vacancy and do not use age or salary as criteria for employment. They want the best teacher for their children. Equal opportunity and employment legislation requires them to do that. However, once they employ a teacher, they are stuck with him or her. That teacher gets older, and the school has no control over the increasing cost. Various schools have been forced to make teachers redundant - not because of declining enrolment or mismanagement of the rest of the budget, but because the age profile of their staff has got older. That is a major issue.

504

We, along with the other boards and the teachers' unions, have suggested to the Department of Education that the methodology for paying teachers, and how that is administered in the budget, should be reviewed. The Department has sidelined that. There is only one paragraph about it in the document. Action has been taken in Scotland, and the system there has given stability to the teaching force. In the document, we start by talking about children and then talk about schools. Every child should be given the opportunity of having the same teacher contact, irrespective of the budget. That is important.

505

We have that equality in some of our schools, especially in special education. We have a system where staffing is related to a pupil:teacher ratio. The schools have control of a part of the budget, and they can make savings on it. The savings can be used to appoint additional teachers or for other purposes. There are not the same stresses or administrative difficulties for head teachers. They can therefore focus on their main job - the education of children. That system works very effectively and is worth having a look at.

506

Mr Sloan: The issue of Key Stage 2 testing has to be contextualised. It is to be used to distribute moneys for the targeting of social need (TSN). Two components are involved in that - social deprivation and educational underachievement. The South Eastern Education and Library Board welcomes the shift in the split of those moneys from 60% towards social deprivation and 40% towards educational disadvantage to what is now an almost fifty-fifty split.

507

We recognise that that is a positive move, but we are concerned that half of the funds allocated for special education in the primary sector are being distributed on the basis of free school meals. Effectively, that is reversing the trend and increasing the amount of money that is being used for social disadvantage in the primary sector from 25% to 75%.

508

Key Stage 2 results were designed for a specific purpose. I chaired the TSN working group that is quoted in the report. In our deliberations, it was categorically stated to us that the Key Stage 2 test had never been designed to allocate finance for special needs. There is a slightly misleading comment in the report to the effect that the working group suggested that Key Stage 2 tests should be used for that purpose in the secondary sector.

509

We actually said that if the tests were properly designed, and were sufficiently discriminatory, they could be used not only for that purpose, but also perhaps as an alternative to other testing that takes place at primary seven.

510

The Key Stage 2 tests - and also Key Stage 3 tests in relation to senior high schools - do not provide a reliable basis on which to determine special needs in the post-primary sector. The schools have a different contextual setting - the children move around and are introduced to different subjects. We talked at length with post-primary principals. They are vehemently opposed to the use of the tests, and we support their view. We strongly oppose the use of the tests, in a backward sense, to fund primary schools. We see that as rewarding failure rather than success.

511

We have a number of schools which use their LMS budgets to employ a special needs co-ordinator. Such co-ordinators work very closely with the families, parents and children to raise the standards of attainment of the children involved. When the children first come to the school, they have special educational needs. However, the work of the co-ordinator, together with that of the other teachers, often raises the achievement of those children, at primary seven stage, to meet the requirements of the various performance levels in Key Stage 2 that would not attract special needs funding. You are really saying to the school "Because you have worked very hard with the youngsters and have brought them up to those levels, we are not going to give you that money." That an unfortunate step, and we are opposed to it.

512

We believe that there are tests that could be developed through the baseline testing currently being piloted by the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment. That could be looked at. It would enable schools, without implementing other testing, to assess children as they come in. Schools have to make that assessment anyway.

513

This morning I received a copy of the Department's business plan for 2001-02. It talks about consultation on legislative provision to be made for Northern Ireland, taking into account the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 in England. You are probably aware that under that Act there is an "accessibility strategy" whereby more and more children with special educational needs will be brought into schools. Schools will be converted to accommodate that. At this stage, the proposals to use Key Stage 2 are very much focused on children who have a certain level of "intellectual development", which means that they need additional help. If that comes through, there will be massive implications. I simply stop and ask whether now is the right time to do this in isolation, given the other developments.

514

Mr Brown: The document outlines a "low" and a "high" aggregated schools budget (ASB). However, both scenarios are predicated on there being no additional money for education. If there is no additional money under either the "low ASB" or "high ASB" models, money will simply be moved about the system and you will be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

515

One of the key aspects in the document is a move from post-primary to primary of about 4%. The South Eastern Board supports that and has been working with the Department of Education over many years to make such an adjustment. However, the board does not favour such a move at the expense of the post-primary sector.

516

When the Education Committee in Westminster looked at this matter, it said that there should be a move from post-primary to primary, but not at the expense of post-primary. Additional moneys should be put in, albeit weighted in favour of the primary sector, but money should not be taken away from the post-primary sector. I do not believe that anyone is saying that any school is currently over-funded. To move money away from one sector to another will cause significant difficulty.

517

The document indicates that the Department will do that in determining the ASB. It is also implying that the general schools budget - the elements held back at the centre - will be set by the Department. Consequently, the Department will be reducing the ability of the board to address its other responsibilities such as youth and school meals. That will cause significant difficulties for the board.

518

A few weeks ago, the Assembly expressed a view that there should be changes in the transport arrangements. If implemented, those would have a significant impact on the education budget; they would almost double the amount of money going to transport. We currently spend over £10 million on transport. Such changes, combined with the proposal to move other money about, would, if there were no additional moneys, place the board in an impossible situation vis-à-vis its statutory responsibilities and the addressing of the needs and priorities of its community.

519

The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. I would point out that the transport recommendations referred to were contained in a report by the Assembly's Environment Committee.

520

Mr Brown: Yes, I appreciate that.

521

The Chairperson: Those recommendations have not yet been tabled before the Assembly, but we take your point.

522

Ms Lewsley: On teachers' salaries, can you advise what percentage of schools in your board is likely to qualify for support under the teachers' salary protection factor? Also, what proposals would you put forward to improve the treatment of teachers' salaries under LMS?

523

Mr Fitzsimons: Teachers' salaries should be based on the number of children recommended to be in a class. In other words, the Department of Education should, after consultation, establish pupil:teacher ratios for primary, lower-primary, upper-primary and secondary schools. Each school would be allocated the relevant number of teachers, and the money for those teachers - the actual cost of the teachers - would be given to the school. The school would not have to worry about finding the money for those teachers. The only way those teachers would lose their jobs would be if the number of pupils went down.

524

The school would have real control over the other part of the budget. If it wished to make savings in that, it could use the money to appoint additional teachers or to purchase additional educational resources. Schools and boards of governors would be able to manage the part of the budget that they would have control over.

525

Under the present system, schools also have to deal with the problems of making mature teachers redundant and the subsequent need to recruit more teachers. Redundancy costs have to be paid, but there is no added value.

526

The Chairperson: Was there another point?

527

Mr Fitzsimons: Yes. Over 70% of the schools would have fewer than 25 teachers.

528

Mr Gibson: We have listened to much evidence, and it is becoming clear to me that there is no such thing as a common funding formula. We are tying ourselves up in knots trying to invent formulas. We need extra money. Somebody said that we needed to deal with reality. The reality is the amount of money that we can afford for education provision. We have already heard of the £10 million plus for new transport. We are looking at an equality issue.

529

I represent a very large rural area, and we obviously need provision. We are really talking about the management of resources. Are we tying ourselves up in knots, with five education boards having to discuss these proposals? We are in danger of missing the main point - education provision. You have examined the issue collectively as boards and have suggested the removal of the teachers' salary factor. Justify that to me, please. Small schools, one of which had 143 pupils, have pleaded with us to let them keep the money - even though they only had about £4,000 to play with. We heard of a teacher being reassessed and earning more than the vice-principal. If two teachers were reassessed, a principal would have no money left to use.

530

Mr Fitzsimons: I am talking from experience. I was in a board where the schools ran into serious financial difficulties. We had to cut back as a result. Some schools accrued quite substantial debts, some of which were out of control. Some 80% to 90% of the budget is predetermined by staff numbers. I came across schools which said that LMS was brilliant - their staff were young. However, as those staff matured, the schools realised that they were in a difficult situation. They then made decisions that were not based on educational arguments. Schools know that by making a teacher redundant they are damaging the education of the children.

531

The other important issue is that principals were recruited to be teachers and educational leaders rather than administrators or resource managers. If they are devoting a large percentage of their time to examining budgets and financial statements and trying to screw out a few pounds here and there - as I believe they are - their attention is diverted from their main function. However, if they are told that they will have the basic money to deliver the job, that will provide great reassurance. If they also have flexibility to make savings in other areas of the budget, that is good.

532

Heads of special schools in our system have their total teacher costs met, and they can manage the remainder of the budget. They are delighted with that. They would not want to move to LMS. We have other principals who say that they do not need the stress. We also see a situation where good teachers are lost to the system. Young teachers get a job, and they lose that job, not because they have failed to do it effectively, but because the rest of the staff have matured.

533

Mr Gallagher: Mr Brown made the point about the need for additional money. Without that money, there could well be a threat to services such as the youth service and the school transport service, which seems to be very important in your board area. You mentioned a figure of £10 million. What proportion is that of the total central budget?

534

Mr Brown: Transport is 5·7% of the board's recurrent revenue budget. This year the transport budget is almost £10·5 million.

535

Mr S Wilson: On the matter of teachers' salaries, you seem to be totally at variance with all of the schools that have given evidence to the Committee. Regardless of whether the schools are big, small, controlled, maintained, voluntary or whatever, the people who have to apply this are saying, almost universally, that although it might create difficulties for them, they welcome the flexibility. This morning a principal from a secondary school of 140 pupils - who you would think would have the least to play with - said that he did not want to lose that flexibility.

536

How can the boards come up with a conclusion that is so different from the views that have been expressed by the people who have to administer the budgets? Is it not a case of the boards, which have always resented having to give control of budgets to schools, now wanting to use this opportunity to claw back as much as they possibly can?

537

On the TSN money, you are in total agreement with everybody who has given evidence. It does seem absolutely perverse that half of it is being made available for special educational needs, but it is then being allocated on a basis that has nothing to do with special educational needs. Fifty per cent of it is allocated on the basis of free school meals.

538

I noticed that you said that there needs to be more research done in relation to baseline tests, but that such tests must not put any stress on youngsters. In fact, we are told that every time that you test a youngster, it sends them into a mode where they need counselling or help. In the interim period, while the research is being done, how do you propose that the special educational needs money should be distributed? Are you not laying down so many qualifications that any testing is going to be ruled out when it comes to making decisions on how the money should be allocated?

539

Mr Fitzsimons: In relation to your first point, we have not said who should administer the scheme. For example, if the Department were to determine centrally the pupil:teacher ratios, the flexibility that boards have would be reduced. It would be done centrally, and a predetermined budget would given to the schools. The board's function would not be enhanced in any way.

540

All of the teachers' unions and the boards asked to meet the Department to discuss the issue, and requested that it look at the Scottish system, which is as I have described. However, that request was refused. There is a major issue in relation to the philosophy of LMS. I could bring along principals who would give you a contrary view. They would take that different view because they have had to make teachers redundant as a result of their staff getting older.

541

We are giving you an overview and not just the view held in one board area. A number of boards have picked this issue up. If you think logically about it, there is sense in it. People think that they have flexibility and choice when they do not have it. It is possible to think that you have choices when, in reality, you do not. I cannot see how somebody can say that they have choice if 80% to 90% of the budget is already predetermined by staff costs.

542

There is also an equity issue. If I am a child in a school and there are 35 children in my class - for the simple reason that the teachers cost more - and a child in another school is in a class of 25, there is an equality issue there. That needs to be addressed.

543

Mr Sloan: There are two issues on the TSN money. There is the 75:25 split in primary schools, but there is also the use of tests. Tests would penalise those schools that have worked well with the kids in getting them up to a certain level.

544

In our board, we provide special educational needs money - and we will continue to do so until there is commonality - under nationally standardised tests. They have been run by the schools and have worked successfully. We have applied them on that basis. We do not apply them in year 1, because, as you will know, children need to settle in and get established before you can properly test them, and before they can feel comfortable about it.

545

We have also, in conjunction with a number of universities, piloted early diagnostic tests, which are non-intrusive. They are carried out on a one-to-one basis with the teacher. They identify things such as linguistic development, mathematical development and the concept of rhyme, which we now know is exceptionally important for a child's whole educational development. On that basis, you can assess the cognitive level of a child. That can be done, but it would require some time. We have piloted it, and it is successful. We made our information available to the Department. We have shown that there are measures available that can be used and that are not intrusive.

546

Adults are sometimes more concerned about children being tested than the children are. Adults can hype matters up. These tests do not increase the pressure on children; the teacher sits with, and talks to, the child, learning from the answers given. When it is done in that way, the teacher is informed, and the child's education benefits.

547

Mr McHugh: You mentioned that schools can be stuck with a teacher. Often, if there is a drop in pupil numbers, schools simply have to work on the basis of last in, first out. It is often not the most appropriate teacher that must go. Schools have to deal with that aspect. Could that situation be improved by taking account of gains by the pupils or gains in learning? Sometimes older teachers do not improve themselves at the speed currently required.

548

On the matter of free school meals, the Robson index, in my view, is a good enough indicator of social deprivation. In Fermanagh, for example, income levels are only 70% of those in places such as England or other areas of the Six Counties. That is a statistic that anyone can work on. There are people who will not claim free school meals, even though they are entitled to them. Is there anything that can be done to improve or change that situation?

549

Mr Fitzsimons: Redundancies in primary schools are on the basis of last in, first out. That practice has been negotiated with the unions. It is covered in employment law right down to the right of tenure. In the secondary schools, redundancies are related to the needs of the curriculum. Obviously there is more flexibility in handling that. We cannot take age or the performance of a teacher into consideration. There are too many teachers for the budget that one has, and one must use criteria that can stand up to scrutiny. Those would be objective criteria, such as the needs of the children and the curriculum.

550

Mr Brown: In relation to free school meals, the present scheme - and the proposed scheme - is based on entitlement. Therefore if we could improve the information flows and get data on entitlement - there are issues about data protection and privacy - we could get round the problem of people not claiming. However, that is also a social and civil liberties issue.

551

We, as a board, have encouraged our schools to make it known that if everyone who should be counted is not counted, the school will lose money. We try to encourage schools to make the parents aware that by their being too proud to claim, not only does their child not get the school meal but also the funding for the school is reduced. It is a difficult issue, and the way forward is to try to see if we can get more information on entitlement. You would work on that with other agencies, but there are significant civil liberties issues involved.

552

The Chairperson: Are the proposals, as currently presented, likely to create a schools system that assists the boards, the principals and the teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs? Will they create a fair and transparent system that is simple to operate and easy to understand? I need only a one-word answer.

553

Mr Fitzsimons: The answer is "No", and my colleagues agree with me on that.

554

The Chairperson: Thank you very much.

Thursday 4 October 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Ms Lewsley
Mr McHugh

Witnesses:
Mrs G McCafferty )
Mr G Mullan ) Post-Primary Principals
Mr M Doherty )
Mr D O'Kelly )

555

The Chairperson: Good morning. The Committee welcomes the delegation of post-primary principals.

556

Each of you will have the opportunity to identify your school - its characteristics and size - and outline your experience in operating the local management of schools (LMS), as it is currently established, and highlight any problems that you encounter. We also want to hear what modifications to the current formula would be appropriate on the basis of these experiences, and any particular implications the changes would have for your type of school. Members will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end.

557

Mrs McCafferty: I am the principal of St Cecilia's College in Derry, which is an all girls' school with 930 pupils aged 11 to 18 years. The school is in an urban environment situated in a typical inner-city area.

558

I have a handout that covers my points. Fifty-nine per cent of pupils receive free school meals, which, according to statistics, means our school has a relatively high level of social deprivation, depending on one's definition of social deprivation. The first page of the handout provides the Committee with information on the school's background and examination results. Our school is over-subscribed and has examination results well above the Northern Ireland average for secondary schools.

559

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the Committee and I support the proposal to introduce common formula funding. I have already sent a written response to the report that was issued. One of the issues that I want to concentrate on is the proposal to remove teacher salaries from the formula. I am utterly opposed to that idea. There is no point in formula funding schools unless teacher salaries are included in the formula. I remember when schools were given an allocated number of teachers, and that system of allocation strait-jacketed schools. Therefore, I am very opposed to the idea of teacher salaries being removed.

560

Since the introduction of LMS, we have been able to do what meets the needs of the school. For example, we introduced courses for people aged over 16. We were also able to reduce class sizes through the flexibility that the total funding, including that for teachers' salaries, gave us.

561

I welcome the proposal to skew resources towards the primary sector as long as the secondary sector does not suffer. Paragraph 2, on page 2 of the handout, deals with how primary school education affects secondary school education. Early intervention at primary school level in issues such as literacy, numeracy, and attendance would ultimately benefit the secondary school sector. Therefore, skewing funding towards primary schools would ultimately benefit the secondary school sector. Like all schools, we continually examine ways of improving pupils' education. The high levels of social deprivation in schools could be reduced if primary schools were given more funding to allow for early intervention in educational problems. That would help the secondary sector.

562

Perhaps one of my most important points is the need for increased TSN funding. That has been a thorny issue, and the Committee must be made aware of the dire effect that social deprivation has on factors such as attainment, motivation, attendance, self-esteem, literacy, numeracy and social development. In order for our school to achieve such good results, we have had to put in a lot of support systems for pupils, and those cost money. We must provide pastoral care initiatives such as counselling and parental contact.

563

The code of practice, for example, has been a very good, but costly, initiative. I will come back to this point later on. People seem unaware that when initiatives - all of them worthy, and good for pupils - are handed down from the Department of Education, nobody asks how much they are going to cost the school, or offers extra pounds to cover it. I have never known that to happen.

564

I refer now to paragraph 3 on page 2 of the handout. In order to address the learning deficiencies that come through from the primary schools, we have set up an internal reading centre, have parent-reading initiatives and have employed special needs classroom assistants. Those sort of initiatives cost money. The problems come from social deprivation, and I cannot stress enough that such deprivation is not decreasing. I see its impact increasing on literacy, numeracy, and behaviour in schools.

565

I welcome the proposals to fund regarding the floor area on the basis of the condition of the school. In our school we have 23 mobile classrooms heated by electricity, and you might as well be heating the four winds of the earth. The heat just goes straight out through the cardboard walls. Some of them are 30 years old. The school was built in the 1960s. It has metal windows, and the heating system is old. All of this contributes to the inefficient running of the school.

566

I also welcome the sporting element of the budget. Schools like ours do not have proper sporting facilities. We have a strong record in sport at Northern Ireland and at national level. The hiring of additional facilities has cost us money.

567

I move on to page 3 of the handout. I want to point out my concern about the transitional arrangements. When LMS was first introduced, there were transitional arrangements to enable schools with lower intakes to adjust to lower funding. This was fine, but the net result was that larger schools such as ours subsidised the transitional arrangements for the first few years of LMS. I do not want to see that happening again. I accept that there have to be transitional arrangements, but they should not be at the cost of schools such as ours where every penny counts. To ask us to subsidise the transitional arrangements for a second time in 10 years would be highly unfair.

568

I have some other concerns about LMS. It is a source of continual irritation to us that in spite of achieving very high exam results we are always bypassed when additional funds, such as those available for the raising school standards initiative (RSSI) initiative, are awarded. You can see our examination results on page 1 of the handout. We are over-subscribed, and we are a well-recognised school. We are educating the cousins and sisters of pupils at local secondary schools, all of which are receiving extra money under initiatives such as the RSSI. It seems to us that the more we succeed, the more we are penalised. We are told that we do not need extra money because we are doing well.

569

I know that there are reasons for other schools not doing well, and I accept that they are entitled to the funding. However, my staff wonder when we will be rewarded? When will we get some support? The answer is always that we are doing well on our own and should get on with it. That is a real bone of contention to me. I was annoyed last week when the hospitals in England that were doing well got awarded more money. However, the reverse is the case in schools. The less successful schools, and the ones with problems, get the money. Yet we are in the same community. Our pupils are sisters of the boys who are at the local schools, and their schools get the money, while ours does not. I know that it is not as simple as that, but it seems as if success is punished, and lack of success is rewarded.

570

The Chairperson: Rather than just making the point well, you hammered it home.

571

Mrs McCafferty: That is what I am here for.

572

Finally, the Department of Education often hands down initiatives. They are all good and worthy, but, as I have already asked, how much are they going to cost the school, and is anyone going to give us a few pounds for them?

573

I have been talking to the Western Education and Library Board about a recent example of what they say is a Department initiative. This is described on page 4 of the handout. We were asked to re-evaluate the technician and ancillary posts. Nobody expects anyone to work for nothing, but the net result in a school like ours is that I will probably have to make a teacher redundant next year in order to pay for the increased salaries for those posts. I have spoken to the board, and it advised me to pay the increases, and I have complied.

574

There is no money in the system. The board says that it is a Department of Education initiative, and it will require £30,000. How am I to tell parents and pupils that, in order to fund technicians and ancillary staff, I will have to let a member of the teaching staff go? The teachers are the most important and expensive aspect of the school's provision.

575

I remind the Committee that however good initiatives are and however keen people are to implement them, the cost has to be considered before passing them on to schools.

576

Mr Mullan: I also have a handout to supplement my oral presentation.

577

Newtownhamilton High School would be at the opposite end of the spectrum. I became principal on 6 October 1996 and, as shown in the handout, then there were 103 pupils. We were the smallest school in the Southern Education Library Board. We serve a predominately rural area, with approximately 80% of children travelling to school by school buses. We do not have many pupils from Newtownhamilton itself.

578

Our budget allocation this year was £433,480. Teachers' salaries account for 81% of our budget and the salaries of the cleaners, the caretaker and the secretary account for 10·1%. That leaves me with under 10%, which is not a lot of money to play about with. From that 10% I have to pay for items such as fuel, electricity, gas, telephone, postage, cleaning materials, school trips and examination fees. Our money is extremely tight. Out of that we are also supposed to keep our computers up-to-date, and within five years of purchase computers are practically redundant.

579

Despite facing huge financial problems, our school has been very successful. We have grown consistently every year, and in October this year we were up to 140 pupils. It may sound small to you, but in percentage terms we are up by 14% this year and 36% in the past five years. I am proud of our GCSE results: they have improved over the last five years, and this year 72% of the pupils gained 5+ GCSE grades A-C. We are a good school with a family atmosphere. Our area extends from Kingsmills, through Newtownhamilton and Keady, and the majority of our children are from small non-contributory primary schools.

580

The Chairperson: You do not have any smokers or drinkers?

581

Mr Mullan: That is right, we do not have the social problems that bigger schools face. I cannot guarantee what they do outside school, but I know that they do not smoke or drink during school hours.

582

The Chairperson: Are we talking about pupils, and not staff?

583

Mr Mullan: It also applies to staff, as we have a strict no-smoking policy.

584

How do we manage to maintain our extremely good school? I refer to the handout. I only have one secretary, and without her I could not operate the school as I do, and I am sure that the secretaries present would agree with that statement. We do not have much promotion for teachers. We have only three teachers who are getting extra money. How do you run a school with only giving three teachers extra money? They are fantastic teachers. To keep within our expenditure limit we try to always cover classes with our own teachers, for example, if a teacher is absent due to illness.

585

We have an active school association and the parents are extremely helpful. We use our school for community events, and I try to ensure that these are cross-community. For example, this week we started our evening classes, and I took a poster advertising these to Peter Toal, the principal of the Catholic school in the area. I gave an invitation to him and his people, and I asked him to pass on the invitation to the parish priest, and people from the Catholic community enrolled for our evening classes.

586

We employ some part-time teachers. For example, as a small school there is not enough work for a full-time music teacher. However, there are problems with that because an important role for the form teacher is pastoral issues, and it can be difficult for a part-time teacher to cover that aspect.

587

Another reason for us keeping within our funding is that we do not pay the principal or the vice principal enough. Last week I spoke to someone who was trying to drum up trade for finance, and he was shocked at how poorly paid I am. We also work extremely hard. I appreciate the effort that the Department has put into the consultation document. It has put in a tremendous amount of hard work. However, it is difficult to calculate what effect it will have in our school.

588

One of the issues is the small schools factor. The proposal is that a small secondary school should contain between 200 and 550 pupils. I appreciate that this is an improvement on the previous proposal. However, there are a few schools with less than 200 pupils, which are doing a very good job. It is only a handful of schools; and it would not cost all that much money. In our case, if we continue to be successful we could grow to 175 pupils, but after that I would have to refuse entrance. We almost had to refuse pupils in the current year - we had 34 applicants and our quota was for 35. We could not accommodate 200 pupils.

589

The principal of St Aloysius' in Cushendall told me that he had 143 pupils on his roll. He is in the same position as we are. Eugene McCullough from Irvinestown has about 173 pupils. There are still a small number of schools that have fewer than 200 pupils, and I would claim that they are doing a good job and providing a quality education. We do not have huge social problems such as poor behaviour because we are small and care for our kids as individuals.

590

I agree with Mrs McCafferty in that I would prefer to keep control of teachers' salaries under LMS. It was our school's decision to employ a part-time music teacher, and so be able to offer GCSE music as an option. It is important that our school was able to take that decision.

591

Regarding TSN, I believe our children are deprived, but what is the definition of deprivation? Only a small percentage of our pupils are on free school meals, but the school accommodation is atrocious. There is no career suite or interview room. When staff from the Training and Employment Agency (T&EA) visit the school they have to work in a small store rather than in an office. Interviews with parents are held in the same store. There is nowhere to display careers information. Careers advice is being offered in poor surroundings.

592

There are no proper sports facilities. The school shares an assembly hall with the local primary school. If GCSE exams are taking place, there are no indoor facilities for PE. The school is located on a height in Newtownhamilton, almost in the clouds, so the weather is often inclement. If it rains heavily or snows, about half the children have nowhere to go for PE. There is a sports element in the proposal, and although the children are transported to Newry or Armagh, I would still claim that they are deprived due to lack of facilities.

593

There is no proper music accommodation. Some classrooms - the ones with cardboard walls that Mrs McCafferty referred to - came to us more than 20 years ago, and they were not new then. Some windows are falling out. We filled in a questionnaire from the Department about a year ago about the state of the accommodation. There has been no response. Accommodation is a big issue.

594

The Chancellor's money has been very useful, but it is hard to plan ahead for the next three years when we do not know how much money we will get. Threshold assessment for teachers is an issue. We are not sure if that will be funded in two years' time. There is also an issue of differentials. One teacher at my school will be through his assessment soon and will be on a higher salary than the vice-principal. That shows how poorly paid the vice-principal is. However, in spite of all my complaints, in general I am favourable towards the document. A lot of hard work has gone into it.

595

Mr Doherty: I am principal of Ballynahinch High School. We have currently 366 pupils, of which 37 are entitled to free school meals. That is a small percentage, roughly 10%. Many of the proposals in the document are aimed towards targeting social need and free school meals. Therefore we will undoubtedly lose out.

596

My budget for next year is approximately £1,130,000. Teachers' salaries will take up 71% of that money - that becomes 79% if I include ancillary staff, cleaners and others. No one begrudges primary schools an increase in funding. Their curriculum has undoubtedly increased in complexity and in breadth and those schools need funding. The problem is that the secondary school sector is going to lose out as funds are shifted to the primary school sector.

597

The secondary school sector, due to its nature, will always be more expensive because it has technicians, specialised rooms and specialist teachers. The overall budget needs to be made larger if we are to implement the formula without anyone being disadvantaged. Unfortunately the premise is that that will not be the case; some people will be disadvantaged.

598

Small high schools have difficulties in predicting future events. Currently they have to forecast what their intake will be - and that is extremely difficult. I welcome the proposal to stop basing the funding on proposed intake or the number of pupils schools hope to admit.

599

Another problem is the cost of the teaching staff. At the beginning of term at Ballynahinch High School we reminded staff about their monthly meetings. My teacher of business studies told me later that he would hold his monthly meeting by sitting in a room and talking to himself. Very often in small schools, a teacher can be the only teacher of a particular subject. Heaven forbid that he should become ill or have an accident because the school is then vulnerable. I try to ensure that we have cover and that someone knows what was going on in each department. We could build up experience from that starting point. Staffing is a major problem in schools. We must ensure that all parts of the curriculum are covered, and the result of that is that we are not able to redirect a large part of the budget.

600

We are looking at the funding situation from the perspective of the Aggregated Schools Budget (ASB) - the money we actually get. However, it is important to look at the larger picture also. My impression is that we are applying the formula as regards the schools budgets, and it is right to do so. Whatever is left then goes to the education and library boards.

601

I represent a small school and my school depends very heavily on the education and library board. I criticise it from time to time because of the service I receive. However, I depend on the services it provides. I am not sure what affect a change in the funding formula will have on my school. The education and library board will possibly have to cut back on some of the services that it gives me. I do not want to make its case for it; it can do that very well itself. However, I am trying to look at the bigger picture as well as how the funding formula change will affect my school.

602

One of my colleagues said that his school has a very active group of parents; that applies to my school also. It is very important to me. Parents provide quite a lot of money for additional items that the budget does not cover. If transport should become an issue for me rather than for the education and library board, it would have a significant impact on the amount of money that I could spend in the classroom.

603

I am in a situation where my school is in competition, to some extent, with other schools. There are approximately 17 feeder primary schools in my area, although they each do not provide my school with pupils every year. My main feeder school is the primary school in Ballynahinch but youngsters come to my school from an area that stretches from Carryduff to Newcastle, and from Lisburn and Annahilt to Crossgar and Downpatrick.

604

I have to get out there and make sure that those primary schools realise that my school is providing a worthwhile and quality service. That takes time. Occasionally, some youngsters want to go to one of the other schools in the area. Because of the overall numbers in my school, those few youngsters moving has a big impact on the pupil numbers and, consequently, on my budget. That is a problem for us. The age-weighted pupil units (AWPU) is, therefore, a significant part of my budget. The amount for premises and so on, based on the proposals, will not affect me greatly. I may, however, lose out in the amounts that I get through AWPUs and free school meals.

605

The level of free school meals in my school is low. Pride might be a factor in that. A lot of youngsters in my school come from rural communities and there is still a degree of pride there; people will not apply for free school meals, even though they are entitled to them. I am also quite close to Belfast, so a lot of the parents commute to Belfast and probably have well-paid jobs. Therefore, the use of the free school meals uptake as a measurement has an effect on my overall budget.

606

The Chairperson: Mr O'Kelly, we have circulated your private submission to members. You are, however, welcome to give a presentation on behalf of your college.

607

Mr O'Kelly: Thank you for the invitation. I am principal of Lumen Christi College, which opened in 1997. We are heavily oversubscribed with grade A pupils. That is a cross that we will have to bear. If we are successful at examination times, people say "Well, what would you expect?" and if we are not successful they will say "It is about time that he was going". That is the situation that we are in.

608

I was on the original steering committee. I worked for the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) at that time, and I had the responsibility for LMS. I was aware of the tensions that were building up, particularly in relation to TSN and the idea that the voluntary grammar schools were grossly over-funded. As I said in my response, it is important to look at a school's commitment, rather than at what a school gets. Grammar schools have particular commitments that other schools do not have. The real debate and discussion on the document will come when the schools get their budgets; they will see then whether they have become "winners" or "losers". People will put their views more strongly at that stage.

609

The voluntary grammar schools system is a very efficient one. A lot of our money comes from the Department of Education, and we have more control over the budgets than people in the controlled and maintained sectors have. The TSN factor was a particular concern. I agree with Mrs McCafferty that a change could affect that. A vast improvement has taken place in schools over the past few years. It is noticeable that the steering committee - of which I was a member - could not reach agreement on the matter. In fact, at the end, they were looking at the breakdown between special educational needs (SEN) and TSN, following a letter from one of the education and library boards that suggested it should be fifty-fifty. That then turned out to be its suggestion.

610

Inevitably, the Catholic voluntary grammar schools will lose out. They are going to be hit by the TSN change. Other schools will get some of the TSN money back through SEN, but the voluntary grammar schools - and the Catholic voluntary grammar schools have the higher percentage of TSN - will lose that money. That might be indirect discrimination and could have policy appraisal and fair treatment (PAFT) implications.

611

Post-16 education is a major concern for grammar schools because the weighting does not reflect the change in the curriculum. There is now greater teacher-contact time needed to deliver the AS levels and key skills. That issue needs to be looked at because it will also affect secondary schools. My school is different from the other schools as it has not yet moved up to A Level, so we will not miss what we have not had. However, some voluntary grammar schools will be affected badly.

612

We would like to see more money being spent on schools. More Curriculum Advisory and Support Service (CASS) money could be spent on the bigger schools, although that could create problems for smaller schools that may not be able to afford in-service training. My school is responsible for school dinners, on which we make a profit that goes back into the school.

613

The suggestion that teachers' salaries and the appointment of teachers should be the boards' decision worries me. After all, the boards are the managers of the controlled schools, and that may bring their neutrality into doubt. That may not facilitate equal sharing between schools, because it did not happen in the past. In the CCMS we found that the school that shouted loudest got the extra teachers.

614

If another school gets £50,000 more than mine does, I should be able to pick that up on the out-turn statements. However, I am concerned that I will not know whether it has £50,000 worth of teachers more than my school, because that will not be indicated in the budget statement.

615

I have pre-empted Mr Durkan by saying that perhaps we should look at what we can afford in future. I have also suggested some issues that the Committee could consider.

616

Mrs E Bell: The main concern is costs. We had the same concern about the Burns review, which also had no mention of costs. That seems to be a Government failing.

617

Hospitals depend very much on friends' organisations to buy some essential equipment such as MRI scanners. Will the proposed formula put additional pressures on your parents' and teachers' associations to supplement your budget? You have all said how helpful - indeed, essential - they have been to you. In other words, no matter how grand this funding formula may be, in the end you will still be looking around for money. Is that the general feeling at this stage?

618

Mrs McCafferty: Yes. Children whose parents are better off than the parents of our children will find it easier. Grammar schools can charge a capitation fee, and that helps. We are told to charge pupils nothing. We have a voluntary school fund of £10 a year but we cannot lever it from people. Many parents give it to us as a voluntary good wish; for others, however, it is an additional burden. It is a good idea as it gives the parents' and teachers' association an opportunity to get involved in the school and to make money for the school. However, it should pay for the icing on the cake rather than pay for the cake itself.

619

Mr Mullan: My school represents only 70 households. It is in an agricultural area, and everyone knows the present state of the agriculture industry. There is only a certain amount that can be expected from households.

620

Mr Doherty: We have very expensive plant in schools that close between four and five o'clock. I am encouraging people to use the school in the evenings. Although it may not be my job, it is hoped that that will generate more income. There are not many community facilities in Ballynahinch.

621

Mr O'Kelly: Voluntary grammar schools can no longer charge capitation fees unless they have had a building programme on which they borrowed money that they are paying interest on. We do not charge; we ask for voluntary contributions. People from more affluent backgrounds can be the most reluctant to part with money.

622

Mr Gibson: I am confused because you all want control of the common funding formula, yet what is the purpose? Some very successful school principals are telling the Committee that they want successful schools. You have spent quite some time telling us about managing money. Are the priorities right - managing schools for the best productive education - or is a lot of energy being diverted away from the real goal?

623

Mr Mullen said that a teacher on reassessment would get a higher salary than his vice-principal, who has less than a weekend's money to play around with for the whole year. Should you be looking at that? If we look at the small schools that you are struggling to survive in and then look at the successful schools - [Interruption]

624

Mr Mullan: Excuse me for interrupting, but I cannot allow you to say that. You are saying that there are small schools and that there are successful schools. We claim that we are both; we are successful.

625

Mr Gibson: We need to achieve success right across all schools. We are hearing here a different story - that success should be rewarded. Mrs McCafferty has made that point forcibly. The implication is that there are other schools that are unsuccessful and that will come into competition on examination results.

626

The Committee has heard evidence from other people, and everyone has said that they want to control the money. If there is a better formula or means of rewarding teachers, that should be explored, rather than having 80% to 90% of funding already dictated. School numbers are declining in rural areas. There is competition for school enrolment. Is there such a thing as a common school formula?

627

The Chairperson: In other words, is it possible to establish a common formula that will meet all your needs?

628

Mr Doherty: It is a myth. Every school is different. Schools may seem to be similar, but not when you look at them in detail. I challenge the assumption that any two schools in Northern Ireland are identical. Therefore, we should not get carried away with the myth that two schools of the same size will be treated exactly the same. That is not the case at all. It may not be possible to devise a formula that could do that.

629

Mr Gibson is right. The job of a principal is concerned with the education of the children. We are talking about dealing with the relatively small amounts of money that we can actually play around with. Sometimes we can get carried away in looking at the ins and outs of it. We discussed the monetary aspect because that was the remit. It must not become the major issue.

630

As principals, our major concern is the education of the young people in our care. The monetary aspect is part of it, and we can do very little with it, but we must address it, because we have the responsibility for running our schools. I do not have much control over the funding that I receive. I have my budget, but it is spoken for, and I cannot do a lot about it. Changing the formula will have much the same effect, but it may make it more difficult to manage the small part of the formula that I do.

631

Mr O'Kelly: My concern about common funding is that there would still be about five funding agencies. If there is to be more equitable funding between schools, there should be one funding agency. The Department does that for us in the grammar schools. It will depend on the aggregated schools budget (ASB) of each board because schools can have the same weightings. However, if the value of the weightings changes, then there will be different funding for each school. That is a concern that needs to be looked at.

632

I do not spend much time going through the school's budget. I look at the overall plan for the budget, but I have a bursar who is responsible for the day-to-day running of the budget. That would be the case in all large schools.

633

Mrs McCafferty: I agree. My overall concern is for the good of the children, but I see the advantages of flexibility. If good teachers and resources are the tools that we use to influence the lives of the children, then we need to have the flexibility to use the money in the school to purchase the necessary teachers and resources, and we need to keep the teacher salary element in the budget.

634

I do not spend much time on budgets. When we get the budget we look at what is available for teachers' salaries. However, some adjustments can be made on a year-by-year basis. For example, a teacher might leave, or you might decide to introduce something different if there is money in the budget to pay for it. The budget does not get priority over the children.

635

Mr McHugh: Mr Mullen, you said that it was quite hard to define deprivation. The Robson Report on Relative Deprivation in Northern Ireland defined it as based on the incomes of a particular area or areas: the low incomes in that area versus other more affluent areas as being the barometer. How much would more money towards TSN help your situation?

636

Reference has been made to the uptake of free school meals, and that seems to be a problem right across the board. That can bring extra money to schools, but if people are not claiming free meals, it must be an issue. There may be situations in schools where it can make the difference between having an extra teacher or not. Is there anything that can be done to ensure children claim free school meals?

637

Some schools - for example, Mr O'Kelly's school - say that they make a profit on meals. In other schools the food is so bad, or the value for money is so poor, that children do not take them. Why are there such differences between schools? At the end of the day the small schools will lose their canteen facilities. That is happening now in schools: children are stopping taking school meals and are bringing packed lunches. Is there anything that can be done? Will the situation of children providing their own lunches, or in some cases hardly having any lunch at all, have an impact on their learning ability.

638

Mr Mullan: We were advised to talk about our own school and not about the organisation that selected us. I would speak highly of my own school's canteen facilities. A colleague here hit the nail on the head when he said that many children are not claiming what they are entitled to. At the beginning of every school year I announce in morning assembly that application forms for free school meals are available in the office, but there is a reluctance to apply for them. They seem to be regarded as charity, rather than as entitlement. I do not know how to overcome that obstacle.

639

Mr McHugh: Having to apply for free school meals has been a stigma for many years - a stigma akin to failure in the 11-plus. How much of an increase in TSN is needed to deal with the deprivation factor in the affected schools?

640

Mrs McCafferty: The document has offered to increase the TSN element from 5% to 5·5%. I could not put a figure on it, but, as I have said in the handout, there needs to be an awareness of the difference that a school can make. There is a cost for additional services, which do work and can address problems such as social neglect and literacy difficulties. The increase is welcome and TSN is a very important factor. There are many schools similar to mine with very high levels of free school meals.

641

Mr McHugh: Do you feel that TSN is well enough defined as to what is deprivation?

642

Mrs McCafferty: Schools will be asked to account for their spending. To some extent, that is already being done. I do not have a problem outlining our spending to the board. If someone were to give me money, it would not take me very long to outline what to spend it on. I reassure Mr Gibson that filling in the necessary forms would not take me away from the good work with the children.

643

Mr Doherty: I have concerns about the way that TSN may be calculated using the Key Stage 2 results. My colleagues feel that the Key Stage 2 results are not as reliable as some other test results. That would need to be looked at.

644

If you look at the graphs and compare the free schools meals uptake with attendance, you will see that there is considerable variation and range in these two factors. That issue also needs to be considered.

645

Mr O'Kelly: I have outlined clearly my views on TSN in my document.

646

The Chairperson: We have been beaten by time.

647

I have one last question. Do you think that the current proposals will assist the boards, the principals and the teachers to improve the learning of all pupils according to their needs, and will they create a fair, transparent and simple-to-operate system which will be easy to understand?

648

Mrs McCafferty: Nothing is perfect, and it is not possible to design something that will please everyone, but these are steps in the right direction.

649

The Chairperson: That is generally supported then.

650

Thank you for your attendance this morning.

Thursday 4 October 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Ms Lewsley
Mr McHugh

Witnesses:
Mrs H McClenaghan ) Southern Education
Mr T Heron ) and Library Board
Mr W Burke )

651

The Chairperson: Welcome to the Committee. We have received your submission, and we now invite you to make a short presentation after which Members will ask questions.

652

Mrs McClenaghan: Thank you. I am the chief executive of the Southern Education and Library Board. I am accompanied by Mr Terry Heron, head of corporate services - which includes the financial division of the board - and Mr Walter Burke, the assistant senior education officer, whose responsibilities cover education as well as other services, including special education.

653

Our response to the Department of Education was based on six meetings, which were well attended by school principals and governors. The Board's submission very much reflected the views of the schools, and board members, in its area. We identified three key issues which my colleagues will now discuss with the Committee.

654

Mr Heron: On the policy context, the question that we were asked was whether we agreed that there should be an increase in the level of resources delegated to schools. People involved in education would find it difficult to argue against that. However, it is difficult to give an informed response because we do not know the source of the additional resources or the consequences of redirecting resources. We would like to see the data that should be available under the equality impact assessment that is required under section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. We could support the introduction of additional resources. However, if it is a matter of redirecting resources then we need to be clear about the implications.

655

It is unfortunate that the Department of Education has raised expectations about £15 million of additional funding. That figure is mentioned in the consultation document. We understood that the consultation was about a fairer mechanism for distributing the available resources. The mention of £15 million of additional funding could be very misleading for schools that are looking at the "high aggregated schools budget" ("high ASB") option.

656

The consultation should be about the fairest mechanism for distributing funding; it should not be about the total amount to be distributed.

657

The Southern Education and Library Board's priority has always been to give maximum funding to the classroom. We have also recognised that centralised services need to be funded also. Special education, the psychology service and the education welfare service are particularly important. We have a large number of mobile classrooms, and we are very keen to improve the schools' estate. There has been a great deal of talk recently about transport. As a rural board, we are very keen to provide a safe and efficient transport service. We want to know whether the "additional" resources will simply be redirected from the centre and whether they will affect these essential services.

658

We have a widely dispersed rural population. We have striven to have our rurality recognised in the assessment of relative needs exercise, and we have had some limited success in recent years. If the policy context involves reallocation, we would like to know where those resources will come from.

659

Demographic trends mean that more and more schools are falling into the small schools section. We have included a table on that in our document. Two factors that will support rural schools are included in the consultation document - the small schools support factor and the treatment of teachers' salaries. The Southern Board supports those factors, as they are a vast improvement on the present situation and will redirect moneys towards the small schools. Our policy is to have a viable network of rural schools throughout the area.

660

One of our concerns, however, is about the treatment of teachers' salaries. The proposal is to partially compensate schools with between four and 25 teachers for above-average salary costs. That could affect 96% of primary schools in the board's area. We cannot say that they are all small schools or that the 4% that are excluded should get no support whatsoever for above-average teacher salary costs.

661

Teachers' salaries account for 80% of most schools' budgets. The proposal undoubtedly helps small schools, but it may not be the best way to support them. We suggest that the funding of actual teachers' salaries should be considered. The present mechanism for funding schools is based mainly on the age-weighted pupil unit (AWPU) factor. It is very difficult to understand how that factor is made up. Why is it 1·655 or 1·675 or 2·255? We believe that it would be better to use the pupil:teacher ratio, which all schools, teachers and pupils understand. A funding mechanism built around the pupil:teacher ratio for the different sizes of schools could replace the AWPU factor, the small schools factor and the teachers' salaries protection factor. It would make the formula much more transparent and more easily understood and predictable. We would certainly not want to do that outside of the local management of schools (LMS).

662

A graph showing the pupil:teacher ratio for the different sizes of schools would determine the amount of funding that should be delegated to schools. It would then be up to the school to decide how to spend the money. It would not have to follow the graph slavishly in employing that number of teachers; we would fund the school for the actual cost of those teachers, and it could decide to spend the money in whatever way it wanted. That alternative should be investigated.

663

The chief executives have put some proposals to the Department of Education, but these will require further investigation and statistical consultancy support. The factors in the proposed formula for rural schools will certainly help, but alternative proposals should also be examined.

664

Mr Burke: The board and many of the schools are gravely concerned about the effect that the proposals for a common funding formula would have on special units. In the Southern Board, children with moderate learning difficulties are provided for through special units in the mainstream schools.

665

That is a unique provision. The Southern Board does not have any special moderate learning difficulty schools - all provision is via the mainstream schools. The board's philosophy is one of inclusion and integration. Where possible, young people are educated with their peers in a local school, and they are not taken out of their local community. Teacher and classroom assistant costs for moderate learning difficulty units are paid for centrally by the board. Pupils are weighted at 0·9 of the AWPU, and an additional £4,000 is provided for each unit to support and encourage the philosophy of integration and inclusion.

666

The current proposals, if implemented, would result in a reduction in the school budget of between £500 and £700 per pupil. Schools, in partnership with the board, have developed a sound educational model for the young people involved, and the current proposals would have a very detrimental effect on the children's education. That group of children is very vulnerable, and there are between 800 and 900 such pupils in the Southern Board area. They are completely educated within mainstream schools, and they enjoy all the activities of a mainstream school. They can benefit from local educational provision. It is important that those young people be educated in mainstream schools.

667

Some mainstream schools have alerted us to the difficulties that they would encounter if the level of funding were reduced by between £500 and £700 per pupil. Indeed, a number of schools have told us that they would be unable to maintain moderate learning difficulty units and that alternative provision would, therefore, have to be made for those young people.

668

The Chairperson: The Minister has this morning announced an extension to the period in which LMS will be formally implemented. It was to be 2002, but will now be 2003. The Committee welcomes that announcement.

669

Ms Lewsley: If the funding proposals were to go ahead, and between £500 and £700 per pupil were to be lost, you would have to consider changing the nature of the provision. How many children would lose out because of that? What systems do other boards use for children with moderate learning difficulties?

670

Mr Burke: Between 800 and 900 pupils have been identified, under the full assessment code of practice, as having moderate learning difficulties. To mirror the provision in other boards would mean providing special schools for many of those children. That is far more expensive and, more importantly, the education and welfare of the young people would be changed because they would be being taken from their own communities. Providing for that number of pupils would mean three or four special schools located at strategic venues throughout the board area. Many children would have to travel long distances to attend those schools. While the board must provide for children with severe learning difficulties through a central mechanism of special schools, it is not felt that the use of special schools for young people with moderate learning difficulties is the best educational philosophy. Indeed, we believe it to be the wrong educational philosophy.

671

Mr S Wilson: I want to explore the impact of the proposals on small schools. There will be additional money for small schools. The board's figures show that in both the controlled and maintained sectors - even under the current arrangements - two thirds of schools are able to operate without going into deficit.

672

How many schools currently in deficit will have their financial situation rectified by the additional funding for small schools through the small schools factor? Will that pick up the remaining third? Why is there such a large discrepancy? Two thirds of small schools are able to run at a surplus, but one third of them operates at a deficit.

673

Along with almost everyone else who has given evidence to the Committee, you have said that the use of free school meals is an inappropriate way of allocating funding for special educational needs. Many of them have not suggested an alternative, but you have suggested that it might be better to use the Warnock factor indicator. Can you explain that concept please?

674

Mr Heron: The number of schools in deficit is not a great indication of need. We are required to manage within our budget allocation. If all schools were in deficit we would be bust. We have an ongoing friendly battle with schools to try to ensure that they plan to live within their resources. We are very sympathetic and can understand why schools get into a deficit situation, but we, along with school governors, have to manage with the allocated resources. Because a school is in deficit or in surplus is not a good indication of whether it is adequately funded. Every board of governors has to try to manage within the resources allocated, and, from time to time, they all go into deficit. However, with our help, they all plan to come out of deficit.

675

The proposals on small schools support would help schools to the tune of £3,000 or £4,000. That would be a great help to them. However, some schools would still find it difficult to live within such an allocation. It is likely that schools would remain in deficit. We may never have enough funding to enable all schools to say that they have enough resources and that they will operate with a surplus. The proposals will help small schools but will not give them all that they need.

676

Mr S Wilson: At current spending levels, what percentage of the schools now in deficit will be pulled out of deficit by the additional small schools factor?

677

Mr Heron: I cannot answer that because we have not asked the schools to give us their spending plans. We have a three-year rolling forecast for our schools, but we have not taken these as a fait accompli yet. If the schools get an additional £3,000 under the formula, they may want to spend it on something that they consider essential for education provision. We have not received that information back from schools and, therefore, we cannot say how many will come out of deficit. Certainly the additional funding for small schools will ease the situation and improve the education provision in those schools.

678

Mrs McClenaghan: We must acknowledge that our overall population is declining. We see that having an impact very soon. If you are in a large school and the numbers drop from 500 to 475, that is painful enough. If you are in a school with 68 pupils one year, 62 the following year, and perhaps 47 the next, it is very difficult to manage. On Monday, I visited a school that will not have any primary one intake in September 2002 or September 2003. It will be going down to about 12 at that stage. We are losing pupil numbers and our budget is shrinking.

679

The proposed formula will shift money to the secondary sector in the Southern Board area, because we have a policy of funding the primary sector as generously as possible. We will have a second, adverse, flow against us.

680

We currently use the Warnock factor for the identification of special educational needs provision. Baroness Warnock's report over 20 years ago said that, sometime during his or her lifetime in school, one child in five would have particular needs that would require additional resources. We have taken that as a blunt factor up to now, and built it in for every school. We will not be able to do that under the proposed formula.

681

Mr S Wilson: So it is not based on actual numbers of youngsters.

682

Mrs McClenaghan: No. It covers the school lifetime of a child - primary and secondary.

683

Mr McHugh: You mentioned that, under your educational philosophy, the special educational needs of children are best provided for in mainstream rather than special schools. If there were a particularly disruptive pupil and he or she had to be moved out of the mainstream school, would there be provision to continue that child's education elsewhere or with a classroom assistant elsewhere?

684

Mr Burke: Yes. We are currently making provision, outside of school provision, for children who are disruptive or who have emotional or behavioural difficulties. It is currently outside the LMS formula. We recognise that in the future it will be necessary to provide for such provision, because a growing number of pupils are affected, as most Committee members will probably appreciate.

685

We are not talking about special school provision for these young people. We are talking about providing an alternative education programme. We are working with the Department of Education on the development of an alternative education programme for young people who are dissatisfied with the schools system, particularly in year 12 where quite a number of young people are voting with their feet and not attending school. When they do attend, they cause disruption to the rest of the school community.

686

Mr McHugh: Is it the best policy to put children, especially the very young, into the mainstream if they are not going to be competitive or if they are going to become disruptive because they are unable to compete with others? We are told that it is the best, but are there not individuals whom it does not suit, yet they still must attend?

687

Mr Burke: A further aspect is the development of provision for primary school children who would come out of school for a time. We are not convinced that bringing primary school children out of mainstream schools for long periods, such as three, four or five years, is a good philosophy. We would be working with our psychology service and behavioural management team. The children would be out of school for perhaps three months or for part of the week for three months. They would then go back into the mainstream school once we have enabled them to get through that difficult period in their lives.

688

For many it is a difficult period because of some social problem that has cropped up at home. It is not, fundamentally, that some of the children are bad; it is because of the circumstances that they find themselves in. We have developed a very strong emotional and behavioural difficulties provision at Kinnego for young people who come out of school for a period of up to six months. The majority of those children would then go back to their mainstream school with classroom support or outreach support from teachers specialising in counselling and improving self-esteem. That can help young people to make their way in mainstream education again. We would be very reluctant to say that a large number of children should come out of mainstream education.

689

Mr McHugh: I am not talking about a large number. I am referring to individuals.

690

Mrs McClenaghan: In a typical unit at a junior high school, the children spend a proportion of the week as a unit group. For some specialist subjects, they would come out, as a smaller grouping than the full unit, accompanied by their unit teacher to support the classroom teacher. That is what we mean by integration - they are supervised, protected and supported by the professionals in the mainstream classroom. The pattern varies from school to school and according to the needs of the individual child.

691

Mr Gibson: Returning to the formula, you suggested a new school formula to take account of AWPUs, the small schools factor, pupil:teacher ratios - aspects of the old and of the new - and the falling school population. Are we really saying that there is no such thing as a common funding formula for schools? What are we trying to fund? Is it education, schools, or ratios of whatever kind they may be? Have you tested your suggestions with the Western Board or the North Eastern Board, which also cover rural areas?

692

There is also a large rural factor. What have you done to see whether your formula, with these different factors embedded in it, would produce the elasticity necessary to handle declining populations in schools? It is a fact that most of Northern Ireland is rural; the greater number of people are probably in the conurbations. We have to live with that - we cannot avoid it. What has been done to test your new formula, and what has been the reaction of your colleagues in other boards?

693

Mr Heron: The proposal to fund on the basis of actual teacher salaries is a five-board proposal. We have worked with colleagues in all five boards and agreed the broad principles. Teacher salaries are a large percentage of school costs, so we believe that it is better to focus on them. In general, we agree with commonality because having seven formulas does not make sense. Commonality should be based on actual teacher salary costs. I am not saying that it would be a simple exercise to get the appropriate pupil:teacher ratio for all schools, but it is something that we could work on with the Department. Research would allow us to see how that could improve matters.

694

The Chairperson: On a broader issue, Mr Gibson appears to be asking whether it is going to be practical or possible to introduce a common funding formula throughout Northern Ireland.

695

Mr Heron: It is difficult to defend the seven formulas that currently exist, and it should be possible to introduce a common formula - perhaps in two stages. That could mean using the common formula now being proposed, with research being carried out on replacing the AWPU and other factors with something that is more easily understood, such as pupil:teacher ratios.

696

Mrs McClenaghan: The chief executives have already spoken to the professional teachers' organisations, and we have their support. At least one of those groups may have written to you on the subject and to confirm that support.

697

Mr Gallagher: My question is about how to get to an easily understood formula. We do not know a great deal about how the pupil:teacher ratios would work across Northern Ireland. You mentioned the need for research, which could be costly. Have you any research of your own? If there were to be research on a Northern Ireland-wide basis, what kind of costs would be involved?

698

Mr Heron: We co-operated on a five-board basis on the proposals that were sent to the Department of Education. We have tried to model various schools under various circumstances - for example, a school with five relatively young teachers, and therefore relatively inexpensive, compared to a five-teacher school with a mature teaching staff, certain protected salaries and a declining pupil enrolment. Under the current formula, both schools would get exactly the same amount. It could be argued that the school with the younger teachers is being over-funded and that the school with the more mature teachers, and the declining pupil enrolment, is being underfunded. We believe there should be adequate funding for both schools.

699

I do not know what the research would cost, as I am not experienced in that field. The cost of implementation would depend on what is decided as being the appropriate pupil:teacher ratio for the different sizes of schools.

700

The Chairperson: That almost completes our exchanges this morning. Thank you for all the information. If the "high ASB" model were to be adopted, how could your board protect the provision for central non-school services? If no extra areas of responsibility were to be given to schools, how would you handle that?

701

Mrs McClenaghan: We understand that the sum transferred to schools would be very large. One thing worries schools, and it has been brought to our attention time after time. Schools are not sure whether they are going to be saved from having additional responsibilities. They do not know whether the money that would transfer to them would carry with it responsibilities that are centrally borne at present. There is great uncertainty over that, and they might not be gainers at all.

702

Secondly, when, out of the mass of figures, we try to conceive what it would mean for our board's centrally held budget, we conclude that it would be a very substantial sum of money. We would, in keeping with the board's philosophy, make every effort to save those centrally held services that are for the good of schools and exist for schools. We cannot see ourselves moving to that at a very early date, as it would require a fairly long transition period. However, that is what we would want to do, even in the toughest of situations.

703

The Chairperson: Thank you for attending and for your presentation this morning.

704

Mrs McClenaghan: On behalf of the board, I thank you for all the work that you do for education - for the children and for the teachers. I congratulate you on what you have done already and wish you every success in the future.

705

The Chairperson: That is very kind, Mrs McClenaghan, and we will ensure that that is inserted in the official record. The Committee - and the Chairman in particular - seldom gets praised.

Thursday 4 October 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Mr McHugh

Witnesses:
Ms E Collins )
Ms E Lavery ) The Equality Commission
Prof B Osborne )

706

The Chairperson: Good afternoon. I apologise for the delay. The Committee welcomes the representatives from the Equality Commission. You may give a presentation, and then members will ask questions.

707

Ms Collins: I am the chief executive of the Equality Commission. Prof Osborne, who is professor of applied policy studies at the University of Ulster, is one of the board members and has a keen interest in this area. Ms Lavery is the director of policy and research at the commission. We have assumed that the Committee is aware of the Equality Commission's role, and has read the written submission.

708

School funding is a very important issue and directly affects equality of educational provision and acheivement, which have an important impact on, and implications for, social inclusion, employability, access to employment and equality. Without equality in education, progress towards the more equal and inclusive society envisaged by the Executive, through the Programme for Government, and by the Equality Commission, is significantly hampered.

709

The Equality Commission's response seeks to focus on those proposals that are likely to have the most impact on equality of opportunity, or, in some circumstances, to focus on the absence of proposals. There are four key themes to highlight. First, given the significant levels of underachievement in schools and the clear associated links that that has to social deprivation, ways must be found to ensure that school funding is used to alleviate such educational underachievement arising.

710

Secondly, there are issues arising from the application of the new targeting social need (TSN) policy that need to be further strengthened through the proposals currently under consideration. Thirdly, we want to expand on that section of our submission on preparatory schools. The fourth issue concerns the use of English as an additional language.

711

Prof Osborne: One of our concerns about the consultation paper is that the funding of schools is not put into any kind of strategic view about priorities for education policy. It is now well known that, while Northern Ireland does well by its most able pupils, we have a long tail of underachievement. The Northern Ireland Affairs Select Committee at Westminster examined this area in 1997 and argued that the long tail of underachievement was probably the most important problem facing Northern Ireland education at the time. It concluded that it was substantially linked to social deprivation and inequality, and that how schools were funded to tackle inequality and underachievement was a crucial issue. We are therefore rather disappointed that the consultation paper does not imbed the issue of common funding in that strategic position.

712

The issue spills over into how TSN is dealt with. The Select Committee pointed out that the figure of 5% that the Department has allocated to TSN since the introduction of formula funding had been produced by it on the basis of existing activity. In other words, when formula funding was introduced, the Department examined things that could be said to be TSN-related. That amounted to about 5% of the budget, meaning 5% was allocated to TSN.

713

The Select Committee was very critical of the Department at that time for not producing a rationale for the figure of 5% - why was it not 7%? If you want to tackle underachievement and do something about social deprivation, why not make the figure 10%? Ten per cent would give the system for funding schools a rather severe jolt, but there should at least be a rehearsal of the arguments about the figure and whether 10% might not begin to deliver objectives better.

714

When we come to the consultation paper, we find a proposal to move from 5% to 5·5%, but there is no argument about why the latter figure is preferred. Why not keep it at 5% or go to 7%? Owing to the absence of any strategic view about how formula funding or common funding fits in with the Department's goals in the education system, we simply get a random figure - 5% to 5·5%.

715

From our perspective - our belief about underachievement and the need to inject greater equality into the education system because of its feed-through and effect on social inclusion, equality and employment - we should like to see TSN given the largest possible allocation. However, with regard to the Department's position, the question is not debated or discussed, and it is a very weak part of the consultation paper.

716

That follows through into one of the technical issues we should like to highlight in relation to how TSN is to be delivered to schools. As we understand it, schools will get an allocation under the two streams representing TSN on the simple basis of pupil numbers. In other words, the more pupils you have, the more the budget rises under TSN.

717

However, there must come a point - and I feel most research evidence would suggest this -where a school is grappling with a very high proportion of pupils with TSN or deprived backgrounds when there is more to deal with than the sum of the parts. The way formula funding is currently set out under TSN does not allow for schools which draw perhaps 40% or 50% of their pupils from TSN backgrounds, thus having extra special needs and therefore special funding needs. A simple linear formula with directly proportional increases misses the point.

718

I now come to a related point. While we are very keen to see TSN given very heavy weighting in the common funding formula - here I am also disappointed by the consultation paper - there is, as far as I can see, no attempt to move towards measuring its impact. We assume that TSN will deliver by enabling schools to counteract the problems and disadvantages pupils bring with them, but there does not seem to be any attempt by the Department to set up systematic measurement of how effectively money is used. There is a proposal for schools to account for what they are doing, but we do not know whether they are achieving what they set out to do. We are concerned about the apparent absence of interest in the impact.

719

That takes me to my final point, which relates to preparatory departments, a theme that has bubbled along in public discussion for some time. The commission takes the view that it is very difficult to justify the subsidy of the better-off by the State, which is in effect what happens with the funding of preparatory departments in grammar schools.

720

The effects of subsidising preparatory departments are straightforward. It enables those departments, for example, to have a much lower pupil:teacher ratio (PTR).

721

The Chairperson: I am sorry but the Committee is now inquorate.

Thursday, 11 October 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Ms Lewsley
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:
Mr M McGuinness ) Minister of Education
Dr M Browne ) Department of Education
Mr J Caldwell )
Mr G Manderson )

722

The Chairperson: Good morning. I welcome the Minister and his officials. We are discussing the consultation exercise and proposals for a common funding formula. Minister, I understand that you have a time restriction. I should appreciate it if members bore that in mind and kept their questions and answers concise. Minister, perhaps you might give us your presentation, after which we shall go straight into questions. Following your departure your officials may continue furnishing us with details of the consultation.

723

Minister of Education (Mr M McGuinness): I thank the Committee for its co-operation. I appreciate the opportunity offered to discuss our proposals on the common funding formula and the responses to the consultation document. Although the proposals have been set out in detail in the consultation document I emphasise that no final decisions have been taken. We are anxious to hear the Committee's views.

724

The document issued on 5 April and was followed by a series of briefing conferences attended by 1,200 delegates from schools and other organisations. Several organisations held further conferences, and I note that the Committee has conducted a number of evidence sessions with key players. Discussion and debate at this level are welcome and should ensure a shared understanding of the various issues.

725

Our policy continues to give priority to delegated school budgets. It is clear, however, that schools still experience pressure, as evidenced by the number in deficit. We shall continue to seek out ways to increase the amount allocated to schools but must also ensure that the available budget is split fairly and wisely.

726

I am aware of the potential implications which flow from decisions on the common formula. Children's education may be affected for better or worse, and it is vital that all comments received are fully considered. We want to get the formula right first time but must keep in mind that it will not be cast in stone.

727

The seven existing formulae have been changed over the years. Provided that changes are rooted in the principles set out in the document and can be managed by schools, there is no reason why they cannot be fine-tuned.

728

Perhaps it might be useful to remind ourselves why we have proposed the common formula. Serious inequities arise from the current system, such as that by which two schools of similar size and characteristics can have different budgets. The objective is to move all funding onto a consistent footing while complying with the principles set out in the document.

729

The consultation document launched in April contained proposals for a formula which we feel is fair and equitable. In developing the proposals we have sought as far as possible to take account of such factors as give rise to unavoidable additional expenditure in schools. The list of funding principles has commanded a considerable level of support.

730

There have been key concerns, but I find it very encouraging that there was a high level of support for the majority of proposals. Some, notably TSN, received less support. I shall give careful consideration to the responses to those and review the extent - though not the principle - of skewing resources towards the primary sector.

731

I repeat that the consultation is genuine. I am very interested in the views of the Education Committee. I shall be happy to take any questions, and later Dr Browne and his colleagues will be available to take the Committee through the paper summarising the responses.

732

The Chairperson: Would it not have been more sensible to await the outcome of other reviews underway - particularly the Burns review on post-primary education - before initiating this one on the local management of schools (LMS)? Why did the review not include consideration of the rationale behind LMS funding and which responsibilities should be given to schools? Currently there is no wide-ranging review.

733

Mr McGuinness: First, we are all currently very conscious of several issues in education, not least that of the Post-primary Review Body. We keenly await the result of their deliberations, which like the ongoing review of the curriculum and the review of LMS is an important matter. One difficulty is that there are currently seven formulae. Against the backdrop of whatever report we receive from Burns, it is more sensible to make any changes necessary to one formula rather than to seven. For many people education is undergoing fundamental changes, and it is legitimate for them to raise the question. The best way to manage our way forward is a matter of judgement. The Department's view is that, since we shall shortly receive the Burns proposals, the single formula should continue to be pursued.

734

Questions have been asked and comments made in the Assembly on how wide-ranging the review of LMS is. From our perspective, our approach to LMS has been successful. It has certainly been popular, and the responses received clearly recognise that a determined effort has been made to delegate responsibility to schools. That is the key element. Comments will be made, but completing the task would be a good day's work for education. No aspect is set in stone; we are open and willing to continue reviewing our approach to LMS.

735

Mrs E Bell: The document states that there will be a cushioning approach during the transitional period. How will that work? Integrated schools in particular have spoken to me of their belief that they will lose out as a result, for the amounts involved would be no more than 2% per annum. Other schools say it would be 2·3%. For example, Hazelwood Integrated College would lose £65,000.

736

The Chairperson: I must caution Members that it is a mistake to mention individual schools. I shall rule strongly on the matter, for the cases of individual schools ought not to be raised.

737

Mrs E Bell: Integrated schools are especially concerned.

738

Mr M McGuinness: The Department is conscious of the difficulties that the plan may create for some schools. It is anxious to limit gains and losses. However, the process will take place over a three-year period. The Department will ensure that difficulties are minimised.

739

Mr McHugh: Are the proposals to fund targeting social need (TSN) adequate to address the cumulative effect of social deprivation? In many deprived areas free school meals are not being taken, for example, in parts of County Antrim where the rural farming population is in crisis. Schools do not seem to be taking up their free meals allocation in the way they should, perhaps because of the image or stigma attached. As well as depriving pupils who should perhaps be receiving free meals, the problem has a detrimental effect on school budgets, affecting the number of teachers. Can something be done to address it? Is there a way of helping a school receive its allocation and for more pupils to take free meals? People have given evidence from what, under the Robson index, would be regarded as deprived areas. Those areas should have a greater take-up of free school meals.

740

Mr M McGuinness: Dr Browne will address your second point. The Department believes that school meals are the best indicator to establish levels of social deprivation in any school.

741

Dr Browne: In the document we have tried to examine the various indicators of social deprivation. We need indicators which are robust and objective. They must be available and capable of being updated regularly to take account of changes in circumstances. They must be pupil-related, because pupils do not always attend the school nearest to where they reside - they travel to school. It is important that whatever indicator we have relates to the difficulties the school is facing from the population in it.

742

Part of the difficulty in examining such things as the Robson indicators and the Noble indicators, which relate to the census, is that they are based on where people live. They include a whole range of indicators which do not necessarily have any relevance to education. Free school meals, although they have some drawbacks and differences in that not everyone takes up their entitlement, are the most robust indicator of social deprivation that is available, updatable and pupil-related. That is why we are using them. In the responses from schools there was substantial support across all sectors for the continued use of free school meals as an indicator.

743

The Chairperson: Mr McHugh is not arguing about using free school meals as a formula. His point is that there is a stigma in some sectors, with some people unwilling to admit that they are entitled to them. Consequently it is having an impact on funding. How do you address that?

744

Dr Browne: The formula is about relativity rather than absolute numbers. If there is a stigma, unless it is more evident in particular areas or groups of individuals than others, it will not have an effect, for we are examining the proportion of children entitled to free school meals. If there is a similar propensity not to claim free school meals across all sectors, the resources will be distributed in an appropriate way. The difficulty would be if particular groups were less likely to come forward because of the stigma.

745

In any research we have done on the matter - examining differences with the Social Security Agency - we have not been able to identify any groups where there is more of a stigma or less likelihood to apply for benefits than elsewhere.

746

The Chairperson: Does that not underline a flaw in the calculation? That method is not perfect, and we appreciate that it is hard to find one that is. You have accepted that some people say there is a stigma and clearly do not apply, so that they, and their school, ultimately lose out.

747

Dr Browne: The formula is about a given amount of TSN money being distributed - in this case we are proposing 5% or 5·5%. Provided that the proportions in each school likely and eligible to apply are similar, they will get their appropriate share of resources. Only if particular areas were less likely to apply because there was a greater sense of stigma would the free school meal indicator become a problem.

748

Mr McHugh: From some of the responses we have, it seems there are areas where absolutely no one is applying for them yet. They are in deprived areas, and that is why I raise the point. In some instances school canteens are closing because those paying no longer require its full capacity. There is a problem.

749

My other point is on TSN. In the responses, some people have said that they could use any amount of TSN money. Others questioned whether they have the ideas or the best practice from elsewhere to use any increase. Some are looking for ways of using it; others are adequately served on how to use any amount.

750

Mr M McGuinness: The point you raise is important, and we shall give it further consideration in relation to whether we must carry out research into the phenomenon of people feeling stigmatised by the method. I cannot say to what extent it affects any particular school or area, but it is something we shall explore further.

751

As regards the overall approach, the amount of funding to be distributed under the TSN factor requires a judgement on the needs of schools operating in difficult circumstances where there are high levels of social disadvantage and educational need. It must also be ensured that schools have sufficient core funding to meet the needs of their pupils. It is a question of balance.

752

The proposals in the document to include educational indicators and Key Stage 2 results alongside the entitlement to free school meals as a TSN indicator will direct resources more accurately to schools with pupils in need. In particular the revised indicator will more effectively target schools with pupils who are not socially disadvantaged but nevertheless perform below the expected level for their age. That highlights an important aspect of TSN. In doing so, we shall address a long-standing criticism of the current TSN arrangements within the framework of LMS. It will be widely welcomed.

753

The increase in resources distributed under TSN from 5% to 5·5% of the total schools' recurrent funding will raise TSN funding from £40 million to £44 million - an increase of 10%. The additional £4 million will support schools in addressing low educational achievement regardless of social background, while also ensuring that schools currently receiving TSN funds do not lose out.

754

Ms Lewsley: What evidence does your Department have to show what the 5% spending on TSN has achieved to date? Do you really believe an extra £4 million is needed and appropriate? Is it enough? What do you hope to achieve with it?

755

Mr S Wilson: My first question relates to the key concerns you mentioned, one of which was TSN. I do not know the criterion on which you based that. While it may have been based on the responses you have received so far, there are other issues of far greater dissent. For example, 50% of respondents disagreed with some of your proposals on Irish-medium schools. Why was that not mentioned as a key concern?

756

The second question relates to the issue of special educational needs (SEN). Almost universally, those who came to the Committee said it was inappropriate for that aspect of TSN funds to be allocated on the basis of free school meals. In the first document you presented to the Committee, the SEN section was to be split, with 35% of the money going to Key Stage 2 and 15% to free school meals. The new document splits the money evenly, with 25% going to those two aspects, yet all the evidence the Committee received suggests that schools, whether they be maintained, voluntary, controlled, primary or secondary, believe it an inappropriate way of allocating money.

757

Dr Browne said that the money should be allocated to deal with the school's difficulties. If a school has many pupils with special educational needs who are not eligible for free school meals, how does that method of allocating TSN money meet your own criterion of dealing with schools' difficulties?

758

Mr K Robinson: Mr S Wilson has covered most of my points. I still have an awful feeling that LMS is a sacred cow. That sacred cow should be slain and the core of the problem tackled. The Minister said that there is sufficient core funding to meet schools' needs. That is the core problem: schools do not have sufficient funding. The main cause is the staffing element. If teacher costs were actual instead of average, many schools currently in difficulties would not have them. Those schools could concentrate on the core job of educating children, which many currently fail to do.

759

Mr M McGuinness: I shall answer Patricia Lewsley's question; Dr Browne will answer Sammy Wilson's question; and Mr Caldwell will answer that of Ken Robinson.

760

There is evidence that TSN funding is successful insofar as the number of pupils who leave schools without qualifications is decreasing and the number of pupils who leave with extra qualifications is increasing. There is strong evidence that TSN funding has an effect, but we should not disregard the fact that the School Support Programme also has an important effect on targeting certain areas, particularly those with high levels of social deprivation. The Department has statistical evidence indicating that TSN funding leads to increased achievement among students from those areas.

761

It is like everything else - you can never have enough. Hardly anyone around this table would disagree that education has suffered from the Government's legacy of neglect and underfunding down the years. The Executive consistently fight that battle, and the other Ministers are also involved in struggles - they have legitimate concerns because their Departments have also been underfunded. The issue is important, but I shall resist moving into a debate about the Barnett formula, the block grant and their effect on us all. The point is that you can never have enough money.

762

Ms Lewsley: Although you mentioned those at the lower end of the social scale who are gaining more qualifications than before, huge numbers of children with numeracy and literacy problems are still coming through. That has not improved.

763

Mr M McGuinness: The Department is currently addressing that - a review is taking place. The Department is also dealing with the legacy of the funding, because some of those figures go back 30 or even 50 years. Your Colleague John Dallat has raised the issue on a number of occasions, and several businesspeople have done likewise. The Department is concerned about the matter and is addressing it energetically. It recognises that the high level of difficulty with literacy and numeracy must be dealt with urgently.

764

Dr Browne: I shall pick up on the indicators proposed on social deprivation and educational need. The Department aimed to clarify their purposes. Regardless of how well children perform educationally, the social deprivation element should be to pick up those aspects of their behaviour and the discipline difficulties they bring to the school from home. The associated pastoral care needs of children from those areas tend to be higher. The social deprivation element and the free school meal indicator are intended to direct resources to meet those needs.

765

Those children with educational needs also must be considered. Some of those are also socially deprived, but some are not. It was intended to come up with an indicator for that aspect that would identify educational need more clearly. The intention was also to come up with an intake indicator so that we can know the problems with which children come to the school, and with which the school must work. We aimed to include those elements in the formula. We had Key Stage 2 results for post-primary. Children come to school with those results, and those intake indicators are robust. That is reflected in the proposals.

766

The Department had difficulties with primary education, for no robust intake indicator was readily available. We examined baseline assessment, but it was unsuited to the purpose. Key Stage 1 - which is not an intake indicator but is taken when children have been at school for a year or two - is also an unsuitable indicator. The Key Stage 2 results were the only educational indicators available. The difficulty with those is that they are output indicators. Children have achieved those results at the end of their primary education. There is a judgement regarding ensuring that children with educational needs are not disadvantaged and that some resources are directed towards them. While having an indicator to address this, at the same time it is important to accept that it is not an intake indicator.

767

In weighing up those matters we were concerned that one potential impact of our proposed initial split, which would direct resources more towards Key Stage 2 results and less towards free school meals, would be that a school would lose resources as it improved its performance. That is still a problem, for we do not have a perfect intake indicator. We thought that the shift in balance would help mitigate the impact to some extent. While we accept that it is not a perfect indicator, it still allows resources to be directed towards those children with special educational needs who are not socially disadvantaged. That was our reason for making the shift, and we did so after discussions both with the Committee and with various academics.

768

Mr S Wilson: But the new system places more emphasis on free school meals than did the original. The original split was 35/15, and now it is 25/25.

769

Dr Browne: Yes, but we know that free school meals, as well as being an indicator of social deprivation and the need for pastoral care, are also associated with low educational achievement. To an extent they are also an intake indicator capturing an element of the educational difficulties which children bring on their entry to school. That is why we felt it worthwhile working that into the composite indicator while not relying on it entirely.

770

Mr S Wilson: It is a surprise that all the practitioners who came here told us a different story. Not one principal who came here told us it was so; they all said that free school meals were a totally inappropriate method of dealing with special educational needs - that was the universal view.

771

Mr Caldwell: Since LMS began, formulae have taken account of differences in teachers' salary costs through the teachers' salary protection factor, which provides a tapering level of compensation from smaller schools up to those with 12 or more teachers. As the document makes clear, there are really two issues to decide: whether teachers' salaries should remain in LMS; and, if so, how we can best address the issue of those schools with unavoidably high teacher salary costs. Removing teachers' salaries from LMS would require moving to a central staffing formula to determine staff numbers at each school and the complement within it. Complex transitional arrangements would be necessary to move schools from where they are now to where they ought to be.

772

Mr K Robinson: With respect, Mr Caldwell, the world would not come to an end if that happened.

773

Mr Caldwell: No. However, we consulted on it, and only 18% of schools supported the removal of teachers' salaries.

774

Mr K Robinson: Does that not reflect schools' fear of central control in other manifestations rather than of the removal of the burden of teachers' salaries? We have endless initiatives to compensate for the fact that schools do not have their proper teacher complement because their finances do not allow it.

775

Mr Caldwell: I shall cover that point after I have explained the conclusions we reached in the document. There are one or two little charts on pages 76 and 77 showing the extent to which schools are incurring above-average teacher salary costs. We concluded that such above-average costs can be ascribed to three key issues. The first is the existence of staff on protected salaries. The second is a low turnover of staff, meaning teachers move to the maximum salary level for their scale. Thirdly - and this one is extremely difficult to tease out - come the management decisions schools make regarding the salary they pay principals and vice-principals and the number of responsibility points.

776

Mr K Robinson: With respect, that is a red herring to some degree.

777

Mr Caldwell: However, when we examine the different structures of schools of various sizes we see that there is a marked difference. We have carried out some further analysis.

778

Mr K Robinson: Perhaps I might stop you before you move on. In an area suffering the problems associated with TSN, it is surely an advantage to have a low turnover of staff and hold onto those who know the children, the families and the problems - even if they are expensive - rather than bring in the "yellow pack" teachers, as they were referred to.

779

Mr Caldwell: The extent to which schools can afford teachers is an issue. The tables you are examining chart teachers' salary costs against pupil-teacher ratios. The chart illustrating the primary sector is divided into four quadrants. The schools represented in the top right-hand quadrant have high teachers' salary costs and high pupil-teacher ratios. Those in the bottom left-hand quadrant have low teachers' salary costs and low pupil-teacher ratios.

780

The Department carried out further analysis based on the circumstances of each school. The vast majority of schools in the top right-hand quadrant tend to be of above-average size with a below-average number of pupils who are entitled to free school meals. On the other hand, those represented in the bottom left-hand quadrant tend to be of below average size, and the number of pupils entitled to free school meals is above average. The schools in the top left-hand quadrant are also of below average size, with an above-average number of pupils entitled to free school meals.

781

The Chairperson: It might be useful if the Committee considered those statistics and discussed them after the Minister leaves. We are keen to hear from the departmental officials, but we are even keener to hear from the Minister.

782

Mr M McGuinness: Before we move on, Sammy Wilson's point regarding -

783

The Chairperson: I had some additional points in that respect which you might wish to consider before responding. First, why is baseline assessment not available as an indicator? Secondly, one of the abiding features of the evidence given by teachers and other witnesses has been their reference to the lack of information on how and where TSN funding, as currently deployed to schools, is spent. Witnesses have questioned the Department's ability to assess whether more money is needed at a time when there has been no proper analysis of funding already been distributed and no confirmation that earlier funding was targeted effectively. What is the rationale for allocating additional resources to a recipient when there is a lack of real evidence to prove that the initial funding produced effective results?

784

Mr S Wilson: Furthermore, your own document states that you will not even require recipients to show that they are spending that TSN money on TSN factors.

785

Mr M McGuinness: In regard to the important point made earlier by Sammy Wilson, we must study more closely the value of using numbers of pupils entitled to free school meals as a TSN indicator. We shall examine the issue in conjunction with our colleagues in the education sector.

786

The Department is obviously monitoring whether TSN funding is working, and it is satisfied that the money is producing the results we seek. Our belief is based not only on our own findings but on reports by the boards, the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) and the Inspectorate, which is also monitoring the situation. Their feedback validates the Department's assertion that the money distributed under TSN is producing the desired results.

787

The possibility of carrying out baseline assessments needs to be considered. It must be remembered, however, that baseline assessments also involve four- and five-year-old children. How can the ability of a child of that age be measured? Members of the teaching profession have questioned such a practice, as have those involved in recent pilot exercises carried out by the Department.

788

Dr Browne: We commented on that matter in our document. Baseline assessment is used as a diagnostic tool to enable teachers to determine teaching strategies for very young children. It has not been developed to the extent that it can produce a scale of relative attainment.

789

It does not lend itself easily to incorporation into the funding formula. It has also been introduced on a pilot basis.

790

The Chairperson: What evidence is there for that?

791

Dr Browne: That is the evidence from those in the Department who are administering baseline assessment from the Northern Ireland Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) and from our Inspectorate. That is being reconsidered in the context of the curriculum review. At the moment, therefore, it is not in place in all schools in a usable way. It was not designed for the purpose, and we have concerns as to whether it would be appropriate. As the Minister said, however, it is another area that we might consider. We would desire a better indicator of children's abilities on intake to school, and the matter could be further explored.

792

Mr Gibson: Several witnesses - particularly the headmasters of the CCMS - strongly urged us to use our influence to initiate research into the effectiveness of TSN. They were very confident, despite their pressures as head teachers and administrators, that there was no evidence of such research having been carried out. Money is welcome and useful to every headmaster, but they stressed that no evidence was available that TSN was effective.

793

Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 covers equality. Is there a legally sound common formula which meets specified Government standards? How can it be ensured that the full curriculum is taught? Teachers in small rural schools tell us that they are struggling to provide only some of the curriculum. In other words, there is a shortfall of provision. Is a common formula possible, or should we examine funding for what schools need from the bottom up?

794

Mr M McGuinness: I do not dispute what you said, but I am amazed. I should be very interested to hear the reports from the CCMS principals, for I should be most surprised if they thought TSN money for schools a waste of time.

795

Mr Gibson: That was not my point.

796

The Chairperson: There is general dissatisfaction with the measurement and the fact that schools do not appear to be accountable. If a school gets £1 million from TSN, it can spend it on various things. At present there is no measurement procedure in place to make the school accountable. That criticism could be perceived or real. The school could arrange a party with TSN money and say that it had been for socially deprived children.

797

Mr Gibson: I stress that the principals specifically asked that research be initiated into TSN's effectiveness.

798

Mr M McGuinness: We can consider that, but I repeat that the situation is monitored in schools, not only by the Department but by the Inspectorate, the education and library boards and the CCMS. Other bodies from the education sector have a role to play. If we inject money straight into schools, we depend on the professional integrity of the principals, the boards of governors and the teachers to ensure that the money is used for its intended purposes.

799

If there is some uncertainty as to whether that is happening, or if concerns are being expressed about how we monitor the situation, that is something we can examine. However, it is dealt with in the document.

800

Dr Browne: We have clear evidence that those schools - not just all schools, for I am not talking about general improvement - with the highest level of social deprivation are demonstrating an improvement in results. That was included in the Department's publication on new TSN, which analysed all the information we have about education, participation, achievement and outcome for disadvantaged individuals and groups.

801

An element in achieving that improved performance is the extra funding from TSN. We are constantly besieged by schools and head teachers asking for additional money for things like reading recovery. Schools can use their TSN funds for a programme designed to help disadvantaged pupils to develop. Like the Minister, I am surprised that a head teacher would say that there is no evidence they can use these funds effectively. Libraries are full of research demonstrating a range of approaches and techniques which teachers and schools can use to help disadvantaged pupils.

802

It requires the sensible use of resources and proper leadership from the schools, and we expect head teachers to provide that. However it requires additional resources to give these children the sort of attention they need. Their requests for funding for special education reflects the teachers' belief that extra resources are helping. In the document we propose to monitor that to see what they are doing.

803

We have an action point in our new TSN action plan to examine instances of best practice evidenced in schools dealing with disadvantaged pupils. That will be disseminated around the system to enable schools to learn from each other.

804

The Chairperson: Does anyone wish to address Mr Gibson's point about the small schools?

805

Mr M McGuinness: Small schools are a feature of our education provision. Owing to the sparsity of our population and the diverse nature of our school provision, it is important that we examine the issue to ensure such schools have sufficient resources to deliver the curriculum. The current, and proposed, LMS arrangements include a specific factor to meet their demands.

806

In 2000-01 around 80% of primary schools with less than 300 pupils, and 45% of post-primary schools with fewer than 550 pupils, attracted additional funding under the small schools curriculum protection factor in the LMS formula. The proposals for the common formula seek to provide additional support to the very smallest schools, particularly in the post-primary sector, tapering off gradually as school size increases.

807

Under the proposals, around £35,000 will be provided to the smallest primary schools of less than 100 pupils, tapering to zero when the size reaches 300 pupils, and £100,000 to the smallest post-primary schools with less than 200 pupils, tapering to zero when the size reaches 550 pupils. I am therefore satisfied that the proposals will help meet the needs of pupils in small schools. I have taken great interest in small and rural schools, and I intend to continue so doing.

808

Mr Gallagher: Whatever the future arrangements for TSN, they will only be effective if they are backed by the experience and expertise of the schools' psychology service, for example. Everyone accepts that the service is currently not funded as well as it might. From time to time the Department has endeavoured to direct some money at it, but it should still be funded better.

809

The difficulty with the arrangements is that we are unclear about the impact they will have on centrally held services at board level, and the schools' psychology service is one of them. We may well end up with a good TSN arrangement at the level of the school achieved at the expense of the psychology service. Have you any plans to avoid that? Was that issue raised in your discussions with schools?

810

Mr M McGuinness: The appointment of an educational psychologist does not come under LMS. The education and library boards deal with that, but the pressure must be addressed. We are trying to raise an extra £15 million for LMS which, if we are successful - and there is no reason to suggest we shall not be - will address some of the considerable pressures you mentioned.

811

Dr Browne: Through LMS we are trying to get more money to schools under their delegated budgets - that is where the £15 million comes in. You are interested in what impact that will have on the central services currently provided by boards. In discussion with the boards' chief finance officers we are taking that forward with the aim of replacing the assessment of relative needs exercise (ARNE) that determines boards' total funding. That will examine the funding available for all the services, including educational psychologists, outside the delegated budgets of schools.

812

While putting more money into school budgets, we also wish to ensure that any changes we make do not undermine important services which boards are able to provide, such as educational psychology.

813

The Chairperson: The document indicates that, if a model with a high aggregated schools budget (ASB) is implemented, an additional sum of £15 million will be needed to redistribute the existing funds. Do you anticipate, or expect, that the Executive will provide that money? There seems to be an issue about those £15 million. The Committee is deeply concerned that it would have a great impact on smaller schools and result in their being closed, with the service they provide centralised. We are worried that such a scenario might be part of a hidden agenda in the exercise; it is a real concern that the Committee has heard.

814

Mr M McGuinness: It is important to stress that the document envisages a sum of up to £15 million being added to delegated school budgets. That is the amount the Department estimates could be made available to schools if the basic unit of funding - the age-weighted pupil unit (AWPU) -in the common formula was set at the level of the highest current board. That will require the boards to put additional funding into the ASB through a realignment in centrally managed budgets.

815

The block grant for boards is currently determined on the basis of the ARNE formula, which takes account of levels of need and historical expenditure patterns across boards. That should permit the boards to fund schools at similar levels. Under the current arrangements, the boards are allowed to reflect their own policies and priorities in the determination of their budgets, and that has led to variations in the levels of school funding between boards.

816

Where will the money come from? The document suggests that additional funding of up to £15 million should be added to existing ASBs. Three sources have been identified: additional funding by means of a bid to the Department of Finance and Personnel; earmarked funding released by the Department of Education; or efficiency savings from each education and library board's central budget. All of the options must be explored in the next few months, and intensive debate will take place.

817

The Chairperson: You will not be surprised to learn that all of the boards maintain that they have been squeezed to the point where they are squealing, and there is no surplus left.

818

They are concerned that the £15 million that has been indicated will adversely affect the services that they provide. It is clear that, although you are hopeful that your bid to the Department of Finance and Personnel will be successful, there is no guarantee that the bid will be met, and you have no real expectation of receiving the £15 million. If the bid fails, will it be fair to place on the boards the responsibility of finding that £15 million?

819

Mr M McGuinness: The emphasis is not solely on the boards. There are three possible sources: the Department of Finance and Personnel, the Department of Education and the education and library boards. Each organisation must play its part.

820

Dr Browne: The implication of having commonality in the budgets that are delegated to schools is that you cannot ignore the remainder of the resources in the education and library boards that are available to support schools. To have commonality in school budgets, but to leave differences across boards in the support that they can provide, would not achieve the overall outcome of ensuring equal provision of resources and support for schools across the Province.

821

The current levels of delegation across the boards vary from 67% to 74%. In some cases, there are good reasons for those variances, but in other instances the variation results from the fact that boards have chosen to provide support to schools through enhanced support services from the centre rather than from the delegated budget. We must examine that situation. There needs to be more commonality in the support provided by the boards, as well as in the delegated budgets. That is part of the process that we are working through with the chief finance officers.

822

Mr S Wilson: I am concerned about the equitable treatment of schools. The greatest source of dissatisfaction among witnesses was the favourable treatment of Irish-medium schools. Thirty-four percent of those contacted disagreed with one question, and 57% disagreed with another. In the light of that, will the Minister give cognisance to the level of dissatisfaction at the favourable treatment of Irish-medium schools and the responses on that matter?

823

Secondly, special consideration is given to the children of travellers and security personnel. In each case, extra money is provided for the same reasons, for example, problems settling in. Why is there a proposal of an additional £250 funding for the children of security personnel, while for travellers' children there is a proposal of £750 plus TSN money. Depending on the board, the allocation for travellers' children will amount to an additional £300 to £500. Given that the same problem is being addressed in each case, how can you allocate one group some £1200, while the other category receives just £250?

824

Mr M McGuinness: Travellers' children's problems are far greater than those experienced by the children of service personnel, and we are dealing with that reality. The Human Rights Commission and the Equality Commission would not disagree with that assertion. One funding principle is that schools should be funded on an objective and fair basis determined, as far as possible, by objective measures of the various factors that give rise to unavoidable and significant additional expenditure.

825

I am satisfied that the proposals for Irish-medium schools are fair and equitable, but we will take on board the comments made and the statistics that you outlined. However, Irish-medium schools and units generate significant additional costs on account of their specific provision. The formula must take account of that unavoidable fact. The approach that we have taken is in full accordance with the principle upon which the formula was developed: funding according to relative need. Irish-medium schools and units do not have access to the same range of curriculum materials as other schools at Key Stage 2. Irish-medium primary schools and units are required to teach English and must, therefore, carry a curricular requirement that is additional to those in English-medium schools.

826

It is proposed that Irish-medium schools and units should receive additional help to meet the costs of teacher time, to develop curricular materials and to deliver an additional subject at Key Stage 2. Irish-medium units are small, with an intake of nine to 10 pupils per year. They operate as discrete units within the management arrangements of the host English- medium school.

827

Those units face the same problems as experienced by small schools: providing the full curriculum within the limited budget that is generated by that small enrolment. The proposed help is similar to that proposed for small schools, although it is slightly less generous because it is recognised that Irish-medium units operate within the management framework of schools.

828

Mr K Robinson: As someone who has taught in service schools for six years, the effect on children of having to move on average every 18 months, sometimes to different countries or continents, is turbulent. Sometimes there is an ethnic mix among the children in such schools, and there will be an impact on the receiving school.

829

In academic terms, many of those children are one and a half to two years behind other children of their age. Traveller children might have problems, but I suggest that you look also at the problems experienced by service children on the move.

830

Mr M McGuinness: Of those who responded, 68% agreed with the approach to service personnel. I am as concerned about those children as I am about anybody, and I will do everything possible to ensure that they receive high-quality treatment. Some might be surprised that I should say that, but it is my position.

831

Mr K Robinson: I draw those problems to the Minister's attention.

832

The Chairperson: I have already advised you that the Committee welcomed the proposed postponement of the implementation date, and we felt justified in doing that. Should there arise any matter of concern to the Committee, it would be useful to invite you back to our meeting, Mr McGuinness, rather than communicate in writing.

833

It is crucial that the consultation exercise should not become a percentage-counting exercise, whereby people's responses are quoted in percentages.

834

Mr M McGuinness: I agree.

835

The Chairperson: Thank you for attending, Mr McGuinness.

836

Dr Browne, would you like to outline the response?

837

Dr Browne: We were anxious to ensure that the proposals should be as widely understood as possible, because LMS is very complex. We spent much time explaining the proposals at dissemination conferences with schools, and we also prepared the consultation document carefully to explain our rationale for the proposals. We also distributed to schools a response booklet in which they were able to respond to the consultation points in tick-box format, with the opportunity to make additional written comments. That exercise generated the largest response that the Department has received in recent years; it even exceeded the size of the response to the consultation by the Post-primary Review Body. That is an indication of how important the funding formula is to schools.

838

Annex 1 of the paper illustrates the level of responses that we received from each board. It is broken down according to phase and management type, which clarifies the extent of the responses in each constituency. The second page of the annexe shows a more summary breakdown according to phase and sector. That illustrates a consistently high level of responses - in most sectors, the response level is almost 40%, while the level in the voluntary grammar sector is 59%.

839

Annex 2 shows the number of schools that responded to each consultation point and the proportion of respondents that strongly agreed, agreed, disagreed, strongly disagreed or did not complete. The reaction to each consultation point is included in that annex. Two tables are shown below each consultation point; one relates to all respondents and the other relates to schools only.

840

We felt that it was important to separate the official responses of schools, because we received feedback from individual teachers, members of the public and other organisations.

841

The bulk of funding is distributed according to a few kuey factors, and the summary at the front of the document details those. In general, the principles commanded quite substantial support from schools. On page 3 we have divided the main proposals into those with a high, medium or low level of support. There was very strong support for greater delegation to schools, the funding principles and the change from projected enrolments to the use of the previous year's enrolment. There was also strong support for the proposal to skew resources to the primary sector, but less agreement on the extent to which that should happen - some wanted more to go to the primary sector, others felt that there should be less.

842

There was support for the inclusion of a condition element in the development of the premises factor. The increase in TSN funding was supported, as were the extension of the proposals relating to small schools and the new sports factor. There was strong support for the proposed allocations to the travelling community, English as an additional language, the children of services personnel, and for putting transitional arrangements in place.

843

A medium level of support was given to the proposal that resources should follow pupils. There was concern that such a proposal would create excess bureaucracy; in principle, however, respondents felt that it was important to have that in place. Fifty-four per cent agreed that grant-maintained integrated schools and voluntary grammar schools should receive extra funding to support their additional responsibilities, although there was less agreement on the amount that they should receive. There was concern about how that allocation was calculated.

844

With regard to Key Stage 2 results in TSN, it was surprising that not everyone responded. There was a fair balance between agreement and disagreement in the post-primary sector - 36% agreed and 38% disagreed. In the primary sector, 36% supported and 47% disagreed. There is no unanimity of view, and we will look for an alternative indicator or way of addressing the issue.

845

Among the suggestions that received a low level of support was the removal of teachers' salaries from LMS, which was supported by only 18% of schools. Opposition to that suggestion was expressed by 56%, and the remainder did not respond. I found that surprising. There was very little support for one aspect of the proposals concerning Irish-medium units: that they should be funded in the same way as special units, with central support provided by the education and library board.

846

The Chairperson: I do not dispute the finding that only 18% of schools support the removal of teachers' salaries. However, was the percentage of those who support the payment of actual, as opposed to average, teacher salaries calculated? It would appear that that point has been carefully avoided.

847

Dr Browne: We did not intend to preclude a particular response, but to ask whether teachers' salaries should be part of LMS - the same question that the Committee asked us.

848

The Chairperson: That is not the major issue, because, ultimately, it does not matter who pays the teachers. What matters is whether actual or average salaries will be paid.

849

Mr S Wilson: If you pay actual salaries you would be already taking that funding out of LMS.

850

Dr Browne: That was our view and our reason for phrasing the question in that way.

851

Mr S Wilson: That is my view as well. How many indicated that they would prefer the payment of actual salaries?

852

Dr Browne: We phrased the question in that way because each has the same effect: teachers' salaries can either be taken out of LMS or met in full. Written comments were made in response to the issue, mainly from our main education partners, who are more familiar with the details of the matter. In general, the boards felt that the teachers' salaries should either be met in full or taken out.

853

The CCMS was opposed to teachers' salaries being taken out, but the teachers' unions were in favour. On the whole, the education partners took a substantially different view from the schools.

854

Mr S Wilson: We too were told that.

855

Mr K Robinson: Is support for retaining the payment of teachers' salaries from schools based on the fact that such a function could be used at a higher level than school-based management tools?

856

Dr Browne: Could you expand on what you mean by that?

857

Mr K Robinson: It is possible to rearrange the educational patterns of a district in a certain way, and that emerged during our meeting with one set of witnesses.

858

Dr Browne: Some witnesses' will, in their responses, have many agendas.

859

Mr K Robinson: The word "agenda" was used that particular day, and, although I do not like to use the term, I nod my head in agreement with you.

860

Mr Caldwell: Many schools commented that they welcome the flexibility gained by having control over their teachers' salaries. For example, it enables them to employ, if necessary, an additional part-time teacher.

861

Mr K Robinson: That is possible only if the budget is adequate. However, the budget can be so inadequate that schools lose their core staff; and teachers have had to be replaced by means of an initiative at board level. We were robbing Peter to pay Paul throughout.

862

Dr Browne: On page 5 we have graphed the responses we received to the proposal to skew resources to the primary sector. Green indicates support and red is for opposition. There is strong support in the nursery and primary sectors for skewing, but, interestingly, in the secondary sector almost 50% were in favour of extra skewing to the primary sector, and in voluntary grammar schools around 45% supported the idea. There is a general recognition of the need to skew resources, but there are also concerns about the impact that that might have on their own sector.

863

Page 7 includes a chart that details support, categorised according to management type, for the increase in funding for TSN from 5% to 5·5%. Again, around 55% of schools in the controlled sector supported that increase, as did around 55% of schools in the voluntary grammar sector and almost all Roman Catholic maintained schools. There was staunch support from controlled integrated and grant-maintained integrated schools. There was not a great deal of support from the "other maintained" management type, which is a very small sector comprising Irish-medium schools and small voluntary maintained primary schools.

864

Chart 3 on page 8 shows the level of support for the proposal that the balance of funding between social deprivation and special educational need should be 50:50. Across the board there is at least 50% support for that proposal. Support is higher in secondary and nursery schools.

865

Mr S Wilson: The document is similar to the way in which you presented the results on the measurement of performance in schools. In that case, regardless of who had made submissions, you used the report to justify the decision taken by the Department. That decision was wrong, as I pointed out at the time. You have categorised the information according to the percentage of those who strongly agree; agree; disagree, and strongly disagree with the proposals. Although the report gives an indication of the responses to the proposals, how will it be used after this part of the consultation exercise? Will we be going back into a head-counting, referendum style of policy making?

866

Dr Browne: No. We have tried to ensure that the results of the consultation are presented to everyone, including the Committee for Education. The results will be published on our web site. Very often, organisations tell us what most schools feel about a subject; this report gives us some indication as to what schools actually think about these proposals and will form an important part of the consultation process.

867

In addition, the Minister will want to consider representations and arguments put forward by key education partners and the Committee for Education. He will want to weigh up the strength of feeling on particular issues together with the arguments before he makes a decision. It will not be a simple arithmetical count. There will be no complex weighting system. The analysis is designed to inform everyone about the views of schools and we aim to give everyone access to it.

868

The Chairperson: Will there not be a tendency to justify the ultimate decision on account of the level of support shown in the analysis?

869

Dr Browne: Consultation processes have always examined the views of the various constituencies involved. Our format has enabled us to provide that information more systematically. In the Minister's view, schools are a very important constituency. If the proposals are implemented it will be schools that will have the funding and the responsibility. The Minister therefore wants to know how they feel about this. Their views will weigh heavily with him, but he will not be simply counting those views and he will not be making his decision solely on them. He will want to see what the education and library boards, the CCMS, and other education partners feel also.

870

The Chairperson: Table 2 on page 2 provides a breakdown of the responses from the schools. Is the Department disappointed by the lack of responses received from primary and secondary schools?

871

Dr Browne: There are several aspects to this point. This is the greatest response rate we have received to any consultation process that we have undertaken for many years.

872

Schools find it difficult to cope with the number of consultation documents they receive. In particular, many of the small primary schools that have been asked to respond to those complex consultation documents have found it difficult to grasp some of the issues and may not have been able to set aside the time to respond.

873

The Chairperson: Are you implying that the documents are beyond their grasp?

874

Dr Browne: No. I am suggesting that, given their other responsibilities and the pressure that they are under, such schools would not have the same resources at their disposal as a large grammar school, which might have on its board many able people who are used to responding to such documents.

875

The boards held their own conferences to discuss the issues, as did the CCMS. Many schools will have presumed that the CCMS and the board will represent their views to the Department. We must bear that point in mind.

876

The Chairperson: What happens in regard to late submissions?

877

Dr Browne: We have accommodated as many late submissions as possible to prepare this analysis in time for today's Committee meeting. We accepted responses up to a week after the cut-off date. Two of the responses received after the cut-off point have not been included.

878

Mr Gibson: I am amused by the document. It is the type of exercise that I used to carry out when years ago I wanted to fool people into believing that I would provide something by giving them something to play with.

879

Only 97% of schools support an increase in the level of resources. Why not 100%? The whole thing is, to some extent, a daft exercise. It is a matter of raising school standards and increasing resources to schools. Schools will formulate a policy to do that. There are 17 sections in the consultation document therefore the formula will have 17 factors. It will be quite a formula to work with.

880

Are we not inventing something unnecessary? We are trying to invent a square wheel rather than a round wheel. We must take a bottom-up approach and ask what schools need: they need funding to cover teachers' salaries, to cover the curriculum and to meet the equality impact standards in section 75.

881

The document would not be successful in any impact assessment - it is simply an analysis of responses. We are not a supermarket; we provide more than a service, we provide a basic need - education.

882

We touched on the core matter earlier when the Chairman asked where the extra £15 million would come from. We have heard the normal equivocations, such as that it might be derived from the Department of Finance and Personnel or other sources. In truth, are we not hoodwinking the public into believing that there is a better, more equitable method of funding available than is actually the case?

883

Dr Browne: The purpose of the analysis of responses to the consultation document is to enlighten and inform. It is not intended to fool anyone. The first point is not trivial, because schools are asked whether they support an increase in the level of delegated resources. In other words, do schools want more of the boards' budgets to be apportioned to them? That is a key issue in the LMS policy. It would seem that, according to the response, about 3% of schools are happy with their level of delegation and the support that they receive from the boards. That is an important aspect of the issue.

884

You asked whether we were not merely reinventing the wheel, and about the system of resource allocation. The Department tries to get more resources for education because it believes that it is important and that it is a priority for the Executive and the Assembly. The LMS formula distributes resources to try to address factors that create pressure on schools and to allocate funding to areas that schools need to spend money on. We identify those areas and we have tried to quantify them and include them in all the factors. That is the core formula issue.

885

You mentioned an alternative course of action - working from the bottom up rather than vice versa. That involves deciding the levels at which schools are required to make provision, the pupil-teacher ratios needed to deliver certain services, the levels of books and support required for pupils of different levels of ability. Those are not questions that are easy to answer. The costs must then be added up and the percentages calculated. We are examining a distributive model. We have been trying to get the maximum resources that we feel we need for education and trying to distribute them as fairly as we can.

886

Mr McHugh: I also believe that we are re-inventing the wheel, and that, as Mr Gibson said, it is a square one.

887

Mr K Robinson: Dr Browne, have we not already caused a great deal of damage in schools because of our LMS approach? Schools are tinkering with their budgets to try and keep afloat. A school with a deficit of £50,000 has no option but to shed teachers, and it knows that the most vital thing to the education of its children, with all the TSN difficulties it may have, is core teachers.

888

If, for instance, a child comes into the primary one class in that school and almost immediately enters a series of composite classes, the educational output will never be adequate. It all comes down to the system, and if we had core staffing, at least the school would have that nucleus and could, circumstances permitting, buy in an extra, part-time or peripatetic teacher whenever it needed one.

889

At the moment they do not even have the core staffing, and the board moves to try to plug the gap with some initiative or other. Perhaps the Department moves on some initiative, be it reading recovery or whatever. All the money is flying around in the outer part of the orbit. Could it not be brought more into the centre, where the problem lies in the school - particularly the early part of the school, say Key Stage 1 - so that at least every school would be guaranteed its core teaching complement and the children could get off to a sound start? Then we could build in the extra TSN funding for those areas that require it.

890

Dr Browne: No matter what system is put in place, there will have to be a readjustment of resources if there are substantial changes in pupil enrolments. Whether locally or through a more centralised system, we must distribute resources according to need. If pupils generate the bulk of the need, the resources must be available to support that. However, your point about the need for greater stability.

891

Mr K Robinson: It is pupil-driven, but the parents of those pupils see these composite classes and take their children out of the school, thus compounding the difficulties of the children left behind.

892

Dr Browne: There is obviously a wider issue of the interaction between LMS, open enrolment and other structures. However, schools are in favour of LMS, and that has come through in the research carried out some years ago. They support the extra flexibility that it gives them. They obviously want more resources, but they support the principle of LMS. They value the fact that they are in greater control of their own destiny, though it may require them to make awkward decisions. That has also come through in the responses to this consultation, in which schools have said that they want teachers' salaries and so on to remain part of LMS.

893

Another point is that pupil-teacher ratios have improved in the primary and post-primary sector over the last few years because we have been successful in managing to get additional resources. I do not suggest for a moment that we have been able to get all the resources we want or feel we need, but additional money has been going in. There is also some flexibility built into LMS; it is not just a straight formula. There is flexibility around the margins to take account of special circumstances such as the curriculum reserve support fund from which boards may take account of particular pressures where a school has suffered a sudden downturn in enrolment. That is important in giving schools "wriggle room" to cope with a small change. However, at some point you will always have to readjust resources to take account of pupil numbers.

894

The Chairperson: Do the figures in the graphs that you have provided represent the funding through the LMS formula, or do they include extra funding through school support programmes?

895

Mr Caldwell: The figures represent the expenditure on teachers' salaries as a proportion of the total money at a school's disposal for the year. It excludes substitution costs, which are taken out at both sides, but includes the surplus or deficit a school brought into the year. It is their formula plus their surplus or deficit.

896

The Chairperson: The top of the document refers to primary school teachers' costs as a percentage of total resources. The note at the asterisk refers to teachers' costs as a percentage of delegated resources. What is the difference?

897

Mr Caldwell: It is the resources delegated under the formula plus the surplus or deficit or the deficit adjusted - you need to change that bit at the bottom.

898

The Chairperson: So you accept that?

899

Mr S Wilson: I would like to have more discussion on the question. I am not too sure about what you believe it proves to us. Does it prove the point that the Minister was trying to make that schools have high costs because budgets are allocated towards promotions or according to the size of classes? It is not clear to me, and I would like to have had some information.

900

I note the extremely low response to your document from integrated schools. Does that indicate that they are more than happy with the money they receive already so that they do not care what happens to the formula? You need not answer that - it might be a provocation.

901

Mr Caldwell: The further analysis of teacher costs involves exploring the extent to which some schools have above-average salary costs compared to others of a similar size but can afford it owing to extra resources allocated because of TSN or other factors in the formula. That is one of the key issues. We were attempting to examine the pupil-teacher ratios of schools with high teacher costs.

902

Dr Browne: We are trying to identify those schools with the problem suggested to us - large numbers of expensive teachers and problems in maintaining pupil-teacher ratios. They are under real pressure. The top right-hand quadrant identifies how many there are, for that says they are devoting a high proportion of their delegated budget to teachers but nevertheless have a high pupil-teacher ratio. We do not know why that is so, and that is why we must drill down further.

903

Mr S Wilson: Another point made in the document was that the Department believed that to be the reason for certain schools' problems. It is hard to see the pattern of responses, but that does not seem to be the case, despite your claim in the document. From your evidence, the schools in that sector appear to be far fewer than those elsewhere, especially the low-cost sector.

904

Dr Browne: We are saying in the document that it was suggested to us that teachers at the top of the scale put pressure on schools and create real problems, and that teachers' salaries should therefore be removed from LMS. We examined it and came to the conclusion that the problem stemmed not only from those teachers, for there is a range of reasons why schools might have problems.

905

The question of how many schools have the problem of putting a great deal of money into teachers but still have high pupil-teacher ratios is part of the further analysis. This gives some sense of numbers and proportions. As you can see, there are more outside that quadrant than in it. What we must now do - which has not hitherto been possible because we have not had the information to hand - is identify all the schools in that quadrant and find out why they are there. Is there an element of what we suggested and what we found from some sample schools? Is there evidence of schools' inflicting the problem on themselves through vice-principals' pay and extra responsibility points, or is it purely a consequence of their having teachers at the top of the scale? We have not yet been able to carry out that analysis. At this stage we are pursuing the data to analyse the problem and to determine its extent.

906

Mr S Wilson: Does the school at the top of the table have six headmasters?

907

Dr Browne: I do wonder about some of the schools.

908

The Chairperson: We would all be fascinated to learn that school's identity, for it seems to be on another planet.

909

Mr Caldwell: It is a newly opened school, which is just getting off the ground.

910

The Chairperson: It is into orbit by the look of it, not just off the ground.

911

Gentlemen, thank you very much indeed for your attendance this morning. We have had a useful discussion, and if we have other points or queries we shall undoubtedly address them to you. Thank you.

Thursday 29 November 2001

Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Gallagher
Mr Gibson
Ms Lewsley
Mr McHugh
Mr K Robinson

Witnesses:
Mr C Clement ) Angus Council
(Ms P McKeown, Special Adviser, in attendance)

912

The Deputy Chairperson: The Committee Chairperson, Mr Kennedy, may be along later, and in the meantime I will stand in as Deputy Chairperson. Mr Clement will make a submission, which will be followed by questions from Committee members.

913

Mr Clement: Devolved school management was phased into Scotland around 1993, and it was fully implemented in the 1996-97 financial year. Each authority in Scotland has its own individual local authority scheme, which is based on guidance received from the former Scottish Office.

914

Guidance from the Scottish Office - or what is now the Executive - was that 80% of the eligible budget should be devolved. The majority of authorities are slightly above that level. The local education authority, rather than schools, remains the employer of all staff. My submission contains some of the objectives of devolved school management, but I will not go through those in any detail now.

915

Angus Council inherited its scheme from Tayside Regional Council at the time of reorganisation. The scheme in Angus is not based on one flat rate per pupil; it is broken into various elements - teaching costs, property costs, supplies and services and so forth. That is the fundamental difference from the scheme in Northern Ireland.

916

There is also a difference between the teacher staffing standard which exists in Northern Ireland and in Angus. In Scotland - certainly in Angus - there is a teacher staffing standard (it is attached to the submission). That standard allows the education authority to determine the total number of teachers that will be allocated to a school and it is based on the pupil roll. Therefore, the greater the number of pupils at a school, the greater the number of teachers it will get.

917

Angus Council determines the cost of the promoted posts. It might be worth referring to the details of a sample school budget given in my submission. The details on Angus High School give a better indication than the details on the small school. The salary levels for promoted posts and the number of those posts in Scotland are determined nationally. For example, the number of assistant head teachers in a school is determined nationally, based on the school roll. Therefore, the more pupils a school has, the more assistant head teachers it will have. The promoted post structure is outside the control of individual authorities.

918

According to the Angus staffing standard, Angus High School would be entitled to 71 teachers. If the promoted posts were taken out of the equation, the school would have 28·9 basic grade teachers. The determination of the school budget is based on an average that is calculated centrally. The salaries of all teachers in the Angus area are added together to give an average. The number of teachers in each school's budget is multiplied by that average to determine the school's budget.

919

There is a difference when schools are charged for teaching costs. Angus Council effectively keeps two sets of books. It keeps a record of the actual costs for a school and it keeps information on a school's devolved budget, which is based on an average cost per teacher. Therefore, a notional charge is made to the school based on the number of teachers it has. Is that clear to everyone?

920

The Deputy Chairperson: We may want to come back to that.

921

Mr Clement: One or two authorities in Scotland are starting to move to actual salaries, but the difference is that they will also calculate the budget on actuals instead of the budget being determined by average and the cost being based on actuals.

922

The main disadvantage of the Scottish system is that it undoubtedly involves more administrative work at headquarters. Staff at authority headquarters must calculate the average to ensure that a reasonable charge is made to a school, that no errors are made, that the number of teachers in a school has been calculated accurately and that everything is reconciled at the end of the year. That is an extra burden.

923

However, there are several advantages with the average model. It is relatively straightforward to calculate the school budget. It is also reasonably easy to monitor that at school level. For example, if a school has no staffing changes in a year, the actual cost to the budget at the end of the year will be the same as the budget. There will be no variance either way. A school will only have to worry about the number of teachers in a school, rather than salary costs.

924

Another advantage is that schools do not take applicants' salaries into account when they are interviewed. That has no effect on a school's budget. Schools will make appointments based on merit and will not need to take salary implications into account. That is all dealt with at authority level - individual schools have no problem with that.

925

The Deputy Chairperson: You said that the budget is based on the average, but that costs are based on the actuals.

926

Mr Clement: Costs are also based on the average.

927

The Deputy Chairperson: You said that schools do not have to worry about the age of an applicant at recruitment. If a new teacher is appointed halfway through the year, the actual cost will be above the average if that teacher is more experienced. How is that facilitated in payments to the school?

928

Mr Clement: A notional charge is made from authority headquarters to the school. The charge for that teacher is the same irrespective of whether he or she is at the top or bottom of the scale. A teacher's experience is immaterial because the school will get the same charge regardless of salary.

929

The Deputy Chairperson: Does the authority pay the difference?

930

Mr Clement: Yes it does. At authority level, several posts will be created and appointments made that will be averaged out.

931

The Deputy Chairperson: Therefore, there should not be a net cost.

932

Mr Clement: Yes, that is correct. At the end of the year, there will be the same number of posts recruited below the average as are created above the average.

933

The Deputy Chairperson: Is that also true for the staff complement at the beginning of the year? If the actual costs are above the average, are they met by headquarters?

934

Mr Clement: That is correct.

935

The Deputy Chairperson: Is a pool of money kept to allow for that, or, because some schools will be below the average and some will be above, is there no real cost implication to the authority?

936

Mr Clement: No money is retained centrally, but the money is balanced out between those schools that gain and those that lose.

937

The Deputy Chairperson: If a school has a young staff, and it realises that its average cost is about £2 million, and its actual cost is only £1,800,000, does it not receive the outstanding £200,000? Does that create a difficulty? Do schools realise that they might lose out in one year and gain in the next year?

938

Mr Clement: Schools realise that it is equitable across the board, and most head teachers are supportive of that. Schools might benefit in one year, but the next year the reverse could happen. Most head teachers in the Angus area are happy with that arrangement. They can get on with teaching and not worry about the accounting arrangements.

939

The Deputy Chairperson: Money that is in the budget for teachers' salaries cannot be spent in whatever way the school wishes. If a school's actual costs are below, it does not have that surplus to spend. It is ring-fenced for staffing only.

940

Mr Clement: By and large that is fair. There is little room for manoeuvre in the staffing budget, although there is room round the margins. For example, if a teacher leaves during the year and is not replaced immediately, a saving will be generated and the school will benefit from that. Likewise, if the school has additional budgets, or if it wants to put money into the staffing budget, it can take on additional teachers.

941

The Deputy Chairperson: If schools did that, would it be regarded as a deviation from the actual costs that should be retained or distributed elsewhere?

942

Mr Clement: The school would make that decision within its total budget allocation. If it wanted to take money out of property costs and put it into teacher staffing, it would have the discretion to do so. The budgets could be moved about to allow the school to take on an extra member of staff.

943

Mr Gibson: What is the actual practice in the Education Department in Angus? Your teacher salaries are paid centrally, but the charge is allocated against the school.

944

Mr Clement: That is correct.

945

Mr Gibson: In other words, if there is a complement of £1·8 million or £2·1 million, it does not matter - it is separate from all other school funding.

946

Mr Clement: It is still within the school budget, but it is a notional charge.

947

Mr Gibson: You said that the school budget would not vary, irrespective of whether or not there were 71 teachers in a school. The actual salary was £3·2 million, £1·9 million, or whatever. You said that there was room for manoeuvre within the school budget, which is made up of other factors, but that money could not be moved into school salaries. There is the story of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Money could be moved out of sports, grounds maintenance, repairs, property could be sold off, or whatever, but extra pay could not be given to teachers.

948

Mr Clement: Teachers could not be paid more, but another teacher could be taken on.

949

Mr Gibson: Why was that not accommodated for in the salaries?

950

Mr Clement: Angus High School is an example. If the budget has been calculated based on 71 teachers - [Interruption].

951

Mr Gibson: That is the school's entitlement.

952

Mr Clement: Yes, that is the school's entitlement. A head teacher may need an additional teacher in technical drawing, English or whatever. The school would then have a total of 72 teachers. That is permissible under devolved school management. However, the school would have to find the money from elsewhere in its budget.

953

Mr K Robinson: I see that £20,000 is allocated for absence cover. Instead of bringing in staff to cover absences, a head teacher or deputy head teacher might use existing core staff. Would that school have the flexibility to spend what was left from the £20,000? For example, if £15,000 were left over, could it employ a part-time special needs teacher?

954

Mr Clement: Yes it could.

955

Mr K Robinson: If a head teacher decided to cut back on library assistants and technicians and made those posts part-time, could that money be used for teaching costs, or would it be stymied by union agreements? Is that money sacrosanct?

956

Mr Clement: There is limited flexibility. If a school wanted to reduce its full-time-equivalent staff from one to 0·8 because it suited its needs, that would be acceptable. If a school decided that it could permanently do without a librarian, that would be a different matter.

957

Mr K Robinson: Is it not correct to say that in that case the money for the librarian would not have been allocated to the school in the first place?

958

Mr Clement: The money would still be there.

959

Mr K Robinson: Are schools entitled to a librarian, regardless of whether or not they employ one?

960

Mr Clement: Yes, although flexibility would be limited. A school might be told that it could go six months without a librarian, but thereafter it would have to employ one.

961

The Deputy Chairperson: Is it correct to say that part of the money allocated for non-teaching costs is not ring-fenced? Are schools able to use their discretion as to whether they will employ librarians or technicians, even though the money is made available to do that?

962

Mr Clement: Yes, although there are safeguards. Schools do not have carte blanche; they must adhere to union agreements, staffing grade agreements and so on. However, there is enough flexibility to enable them to move the money around if they require more administration staff, or fewer librarians, for example.

963

Mr K Robinson: Is that an opportunistic approach? Is that money available because there happens to be a gap in the budget for absence cover, or is it a planned approach?

964

Mr Clement: It is an opportunistic approach.

965

Mr McHugh: Do vice-principals and principals see a downside to this system? Has there been a significant improvement in employment on merit?

966

Mr Clement: There has not been any change at all. Before devolved school management all budgets were retained centrally, so head teachers did not have to worry about recruitment. Head teachers have more responsibility for recruitment since the introduction of devolved school management. However, because schools have no control over the average amount of finance that is available, there has not been any impact on employment on merit. Employment on merit has always been the policy; financial implications do not form the basis of recruitment decisions.

967

Mr K Robinson: If a school has a budget of £2,531,000, and £31,000 of that is not spent in that financial year, could it be carried over to the next financial year?

968

Mr Clement: Yes it could. There is a carry- forward facility of up to 10% of the total budget.

969

Mr K Robinson: If a school had a large project in mind or knew that next year's intake from the local primary school could be difficult, involving extra educational needs, could it make a nest egg?

970

Mr Clement: In this case, the total budget is just over £3 million, so the school could carry over £300,000.

971

Mr K Robinson: Would the local authority or local government pursue the school and tell it that it must spend that money? Would it be announced that schools were not spending £10 million of their budget?

972

Mr Clement: That is a good question. Resources are limited, and our strong advice to schools would be to use as much of their budgets as possible each year. If the schools do not do that, and a large underspend is built up in all schools, our colleagues in the Finance Department would be quick to note that.

973

The Deputy Chairperson: Can I confirm that that is 10% of each year's budget? Can that be accumulated? Could a principal, foreseeing a problem in a couple of years' time, decide to make some savings and underspend by 10% this year and 10% next year to accumulate 20% of the budget?

974

Mr Clement: In the example I gave, it would be up to a maximum of £300,000 at any one time.

975

Mr Gibson: A principal could not, therefore, anticipate building a hotel in the grounds by accumulating £100 million.

976

Mr K Robinson: It is called a staffroom.

977

Mr Clement: Most schools would restrict their carry-forward to around £30,000 or £40,000. They have, as you suggest, usually planned the amount to be carried forward. Building works may be required or they may want to take on an extra member of staff for the following year. The system allows them to do that.

978

Mr Gibson: So the maximum carry-forward is 10%?

979

Mr Clement: That is correct.

980

Ms McKeown: Approximately how many schools would be running at a deficit and how many would be carrying funds over?

981

Mr Clement: Local authority schemes vary, but in our scheme we do not allow schools to carry forward a planned deficit. Should a deficit occur by error, the school has to get rid of it the following year. Schools are not allowed to plan to have a deficit.

982

Ms Lewsley: If a school were seen to have a deficit of the same amount over several years, caused perhaps by bringing in a teacher for special needs pupils, would it have a chance of having its budget reviewed or renegotiated?

983

Mr Clement: That is the ultimate sanction. We could remove that school from the scheme of devolved school management. I am not aware of that having taken place - it has certainly never happened in Angus Council. Most schools are responsible in that regard, and I think there have been only one or two cases where deficits of any level have been carried forward.

984

Mr Gibson: Am I right in saying that a school could not plan for a 10% deficit, as that would be illegal?

985

Mr Clement: That is correct.

986

Mr Gibson: A principal cannot, therefore, deliberately budget for 10%, knowing that he or she will be getting the money for free.

987

Mr Clement: That is right.

988

Mr McHugh: Do schools consider that they have adequate budgets? That is certainly not the situation here.

989

Mr Clement: That is a difficult question. Obviously, schools would always want more in their budgets. Over the past few years, there has been additional funding nationally for education, and our council has also put money into education. Some authorities have had to make fairly large savings, but we have not had to do that. In the main, our schools are reasonably happy with the budget levels, but, as always, they would like more.

990

The Deputy Chairperson: It might be an indication that when schools' actual costs are paid, deficit situations are avoided. Perhaps what you are telling us today indicates that deficits are caused because of average budgets being based on average salaries, rather than in your case where actual costs are paid by the council.

991

Mr K Robinson: Are you aware of a primary school, for example, having a deficit of over £50,000?

992

Mr Clement: No, I am not.

993

Mr K Robinson: Some of our schools have deficits of that magnitude, so it illustrates the problem.

994

The Deputy Chairperson: We have had a fairly full discussion on salaries. Do you want to add anything?

995

Mr Clement: I will return to some other points later. A separate budget is determined for property costs - that is probably not unique. The repairs and maintenance budget is contentious because it is formula driven, and we have a tenant/landlord split - which I think you also have. That is a minor issue that we will overcome, but some schools have difficulty with it on occasion.

996

Regarding protection for small schools, my submission contains an example of a small two-teacher school. A staffing standard exists that in some ways protects small schools, in that support is provided for the basic grade, the basic number of teachers and also head teachers. As regards property, there is a mechanism whereby some money is retained at the centre for small schools that are experiencing difficulties because of their relatively small budget. The supplies and services of very small schools are per capita and are weighted to ensure they have a minimum level of budget.

997

In the main, we do not deal with deprivation through our formula. However, we would add teaching posts over and above the staffing standard that schools may have. Therefore, a small number of posts are retained centrally, and are then allocated to particularly deprived schools.

998

Good relationships with headquarters staff are critical if the average scheme is to work, and if the appropriate level of central involvement is to be achieved. Under our arrangement, every school has a nominated devolved school management contact to liaise with and that is critical to the working of the system. Some items are not devolved, but I will not go into that at the moment. Interestingly, about half the schools in Scotland have school boards. The boards can be consulted on budget matters, but they do not have any executive powers over the school budget.

999

Mr Gibson: On page 1 of the small primary school document, you cover all staff involved in the school. That is outside of any other part of the budget. It is guaranteed and paid; it is not part of any other negotiations. It may be included in the budget figure, but it is already allocated to the secretarial support staff, the caretaker and so on. You have slight room to manoeuvre - about 10% - but that money is covered centrally and those salaries are guaranteed.

1000

Mr Clement: For that particular school, we allocated a staffing level that its budget could cope with. If it were to have that staffing level throughout the year, it would not be overspent.

1001

Mr Gibson: Can you talk us through the contents of page 2 please? It clearly means a great deal to you, but it might be difficult to translate to the Northern Ireland experience. The budgets given to schools here are fairly liquid. Schools in Northern Ireland can decide what to do with their budgets. For example, they can decide whether to employ a secretary or not, whereas the schools in your area have little flexibility.

1002

Mr Clement: Yes, there is limited flexibility. We will run through the detail of page 2. In the example, the school does not pay rates. Schools generally do pay rates, but that is based on the actual rates bill - so it is notionally devolved.

1003

I referred earlier to the formula for repairs and maintenance. It is based on several factors, including the floor area of a school. It also takes into account the school's capacity. A school that was built 50 years ago to cater for 150 pupils may only cater for 30 pupils now, so the budget is reduced accordingly.

1004

The condition of the school is also taken into consideration, so a recently refurbished school will receive less. The budget for furniture and improvements is formula driven. In this case, it is a notional amount to allow, for example, a small number of desks to be replaced each year.

1005

The energy budget is based on a three-year average, so there is a small incentive for schools to improve their energy management. If a school makes savings on energy, the budget is not automatically cut the next year. The cleaning contract is similar to rates and involves the actual cost. The budget for janitorial supplies covers small items of equipment, such as paper towels, and it is formula driven.

1006

The Deputy Chairperson: You said that the repairs and maintenance budget is determined by the condition and capacity of the school and that if either of those were to be reduced then the amount payable would also be reduced. We have been told that it is difficult to have that flexibility. Under our present formula no allowance is made for a school's condition, so new schools get the same as old ones.

1007

In addition, a school that was built in the 1960s probably cannot conserve much energy. The argument put forward is that you should not make allowances for such schools because you are only encouraging them to waste energy by giving them more money for their high energy costs. How do you make allowances for those factors? Is it hit and miss?

1008

Mr Clement: The energy issue is reasonably straightforward. If there has been some investment to replace electric systems or oil-fired central heating systems from the 1960s with gas, the school principals understand that their budgets will be reduced accordingly. However, there is a small incentive to save energy, given the three-year average; that is to say there will be some flexibility built into the budget.

1009

The repairs and maintenance budget is the most contentious part of our scheme. There will be some disagreement no matter what formula is used, particularly in relation to a school's condition. We have limited the variables for schools to "modern/recently-built", "average condition" or "below-average condition".

1010

The budget is weighted. An average school might have a factor of 1. If it were below average, it might have a factor of 1.1; if the school's condition were better than average, the factor might be 0.9. That is only for illustration - those are not necessarily the correct numbers. It is reasonably straightforward, but we have an arbitration facility, should schools not be happy with their particular allocations. On occasions, we have revised the budgets. That applies more to small schools, because the change in formulas could make a significant difference for them. For larger schools it would not make a material difference.

1011

Mr Gibson: Do you have a formula for working out school supplies?

1012

Mr Clement: Under "Supplies & Services" you will see the per capita allowance. That figure is based on approximately £40 per pupil, multiplied by the pupil roll. In this case, the final figure is £966. As this is such a small school, there is a weighted element in the formula to give it a bit extra. That element ensures that very small schools have enough to replace curriculum materials and so on.

1013

Similarly, the replacement and maintenance of equipment figure is purely formula driven. It is calculated by multiplying the number of pupils by a set rate. "Technician Services" and "ICT Services" are also formula driven, but with a baseline. There is a lump sum in the formula.

1014

Mr K Robinson: I am looking at the figure for "Head Teacher Support", and I am thinking about how we have been driven for so many years to make savings. Is that figure for the central allocation of a teacher, for one day a week, perhaps, to help the principal, or is it an opportunity for the principal to save money by only taking that person once a fortnight?

1015

Mr Clement: The formula is driven, as you suggest, on the basis of support staff for one or two days a week, depending on the size of the school. It is within a head teacher's discretion to bring in support staff for less time than that.

1016

Mr K Robinson: The principal could, therefore, accrue funds for the school; there would be that flexibility.

1017

Mr Clement: Yes.

1018

Mr Gibson: How many small schools would there be in Angus? Are there many small rural schools?

1019

Mr Clement: Yes. There are eight secondary schools and approximately 60 primary schools in Angus. Approximately half of them are small schools.

1020

Mr Gibson: How many teachers would the small schools have?

1021

Mr Clement: There would be three teachers on average. There are one or two single-teacher schools.

1022

Mr Gibson: What has been the reaction of those teachers? What representations have they made? How well is devolved school management regarded? Are people comfortable with it?

1023

Mr Clement: A national review of devolved school management was undertaken. The responses across Scotland suggested that approximately 90% of head teachers felt that it was very or fairly successful. Responses to surveys taken in Angus show that people thought it was slightly better than that. On the whole, head teachers, whether in large or small schools, are happy with the arrangements.

1024

The Deputy Chairperson: The Committee would be interested to hear about how you deal with deprivation issues.

1025

Mr Clement: The Executive led a review on devolved school management. Included in the review team were representatives of local authorities, the inspectorate, Audit Scotland, teachers associations and folk from the Executive - it was an across-the-board group, and I was involved in it. As I said earlier, a survey was undertaken and, in the main, the outcome was very positive. There were a few areas where progress had not been as good as in others in Scotland, but, generally, the response was positive.

1026

Several elements of good practice were drawn out. In particular, there were signs that the linkage between the school budget and the school development plan was becoming more integrated. Schools were therefore thinking ahead in matching planning with budgets. Training was also an issue. While most felt that training was good, it was nevertheless recognised that further training was required.

1027

Under the section headed "Potential Difficulties", the first item should read "Hypothecated budgets". More and more funding from the Executive is ring-fenced for particular initiatives, and that can be forwarded to or devolved to schools. That funding therefore raises issues in regard to the schools' own priorities as opposed to those of the Executive. There was no overall consensus on whether that was a good or a bad thing.

1028

It was felt that support for schools in the managing of devolved school management was important. That was recognised as part of the McCrone review of teachers' terms and conditions. Similarly, it was recognised that IT systems could be improved to support schools more. That would mean, for example, that fewer manual records would have to be kept.

1029

Buildings, repairs and maintenance were a common factor throughout Scotland. I have already covered that. There were various conclusions and recommendations, and, while I will not go into them in any detail at the moment, I will mention the third bullet point. Rather than simply having a specific target of having 80% or 90% of a budget devolved, the committee looked more at whether it was appropriate to devolve the budget. If responsibility lay with the head teacher, we felt that the budget should be devolved.

1030

Some possible future issues have been included. 'A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century', which came out of the McCrone report, might change, to a certain extent, the staffing structure in schools. Promoted posts and several other arrangements will be affected. Schemes might therefore need to be amended, or at least updated, in the light of that.

1031

It was recognised that there are different models of delivering the service. If schools are being provided through public-private partnerships (PPP), then many property and janitorial services will be provided by the PPP concession company. How that might impact on devolved school management could be an issue, because those aspects would be outwith the head teachers' powers.

1032

Again, on hypothecated funding, there was a general drive that we should try to delegate more, as appropriate.

1033

All local authorities are involved in best value, and that might impact on schemes of delegation. The drive towards accountability and transparency in budget-setting will impact, as it has already done in Angus, on devolved school management.

1034

Since 1993 there has been an evolution of the scheme rather than any radical changes, and that will probably continue to be the case. That also reflects the Education Minister's comments in the foreword to the report on devolved school management. He saw it as a framework to strengthen and improve existing arrangements.

1035

Mr K Robinson: Does the issue of the uptake of free school meals play any role in the financial calculations, either through TSN or in the core budgets?

1036

Mr Clement: Only to a limited extent. We have a budget line in secondary schools called "Raising standards", but we do not look at free school meals - we look at clothing grants. We have found that not all children who are entitled to free school meals take them up. We felt that clothing grants were a better indicator.

1037

The Deputy Chairperson: Is there a higher uptake?

1038

Mr Clement: Yes, they have a higher uptake than the free school meals.

1039

Ms Lewsley: Do you get a clothing grant at primary school level as well as secondary school level?

1040

Mr Clement: Yes, but that does not impact on the primary school budget.

1041

Ms Lewsley: You use clothing grants rather than free school meals as one of your indices for targeting social need. However, in Northern Ireland we do not get clothing grants for primary school children. We get them only at secondary level.

1042

Mr Clement: You are right - clothing grants apply across the sectors in Scotland. A recent initiative involving new community schools has been focused on areas of deprivation. Some £200,000 has been put into each area. The purpose of the new community schools is to pull together the various agencies - education, health, social work and so on - and to act as a catalyst for that coming together. In Angus, the pilot projects are taking place in areas where there is deprivation, so those schools are benefiting from that initiative.

1043

Mr McHugh: On targeting social need, we seem to have a problem here with various schools. Targeting social need money is part of the budget, but some school principals or governors do not seem to have any idea what to spend it on or else they are in the good position of not needing to spend it on what it was targeted towards. Are you hitting the targets in relation to social need?

1044

Mr Clement: That issue is as difficult for us as it is for you. We have various initiatives, and not all of them are devolved to schools. It is a matter of trying to get the school to work with other agencies to pull the various budgets together to tackle the difficulties. It is made worse by the number of funding streams available, at least in Scotland. For example, there is new opportunities funding for out-of-school care clubs and so on. Authorities have to go to different sources to get that funding.

1045

Mr McHugh: Have you had any problems with PPP?

1046

Mr Clement: In Angus we do not have any schools built under PPP at the moment. However, we are looking at the issue, and I am aware that there are one or two coming on-stream in other areas of Scotland. I am not aware of any particular problems. In some ways it makes it easier for a school to manage the budget because it then does not have to worry about property costs.

1047

Mr McHugh: It must be a political consideration in Scotland.

1048

Mr Clement: Yes.

1049

The Deputy Chairperson: I want to ask about the moneys that you target towards schools in areas of deprivation or where youngsters come from deprived backgrounds. Are your moneys directed towards specific projects - for example, a school might be given money for an extra teacher or for a particular programme - or do you say to a school that because it has a certain number of pupils receiving clothing grants it will get an amount of extra money to spend as it wants? Can you explain further how you put money into schools where you deem there to be a lot of deprived youngsters?

1050

Mr Clement: I think that practice on that would vary throughout Scotland. In Angus, it is a case of additional funding for specific items, as you suggest. For example, two primary schools and one or two secondary schools will get an additional teacher, over and above the staffing standard, because they are serving a deprived area. It is really additionality, rather than moneys being built into the formula.

1051

The Deputy Chairperson: You include raising standards under the deprivation issues. What initiatives do you have, and are they school specific? Do you give money for an initiative, such as a reading recovery programme, rather than simply give the school a pile of money to spend as it wishes?

1052

Mr Clement: That is right. Raising standards is included under item five of the high school budget. A specific budget is determined for raising standards. It takes into account the number of clothing grants - the greater the number of pupils that receive clothing grants, the higher the budget. We are looking for specific use of that funding to help to raise standards.

1053

The Deputy Chairperson: Do you ask the school to outline how the money was spent? I take it, for example, that the school cannot spend the money on painting the corridors.

1054

Mr Clement: No, a school might ask to do that, but the money must be geared towards the specific aim of raising standards. We have evaluated the use of that funding in particular schools.

1055

Mr K Robinson: Your system is proactive. We seem to react to difficulties, whereas you seem to plan for them. You allocate money on the basis of clothing grants - the school knows that that money is available and that it will be there for the foreseeable future. The school can, therefore, predict its budget and plan accordingly. You have built stability into the school.

1056

Mr Clement: That is the aim, and we would like to move towards three-year budgeting, so that we could give schools indicative budgets two years in advance.

1057

Mr K Robinson: There are community schools in the Greater Belfast area; they are a movable feast to some degree. It is a nice name, and some of those schools are involved in the community. How do your community schools get involved? You mentioned education, health and social work coming together. Are the schools used as a base for those agencies?

1058

Mr Clement: In effect they are. We try to co-locate staff on the school campus.

1059

Mr K Robinson: Is it similar to a one stop shop?

1060

Mr Clement: That is the theory, but it is not always as easy as that.

1061

The Deputy Chairperson: Is the extra money - I think you mentioned £200,000 - specifically aimed at promoting those services?

1062

Mr Clement: The three-year funding comes from the Scottish Executive, and the first tranche of that money expires at the end of this year. The debate will, therefore, now be about how to take that money forward and integrate it into mainstream funding - if at all.

1063

Ms Lewsley: I am interested in the topic of special needs. One of our boards has units attached to a school. It particularly caters for children with moderate learning difficulties. They are taken out of the mainstream school environment and placed in a special unit. They are then reintegrated into mainstream schooling. You do not do that. You put support mechanisms in place which allow the children to stay in mainstream schools.

1064

Mr Clement: That is fair comment. We have only eight secondary schools, so that is reasonably easy to do at that level. It is more difficult at primary level, and, effectively, we have schools that cater for pupils with specific needs, although we do not call them special units. Autistic kids will go to a school in their area that deals with autism. Another school might concentrate on kids with visual difficulties.

1065

Ms Lewsley: You segregate the children - you put them in special units rather than keep them in mainstream education. If a child who is autistic, or partially sighted, wanted to attend a mainstream school, would the provision and support be there to allow that?

1066

Mr Clement: It is difficult to be definitive about that. It would depend on the degree of disability. The units, or "bases" as we call them, allow some movement. Instead of being a separate facility, they form part of the school. Children might only attend the base for half of the week.

1067

Mr Gibson: Can I clarify whether the allocations for raising standards go on year after year, regardless whether standards are raised? Do they continue to be based on clothing grants?

1068

Mr Clement: Angus Council has had that budget for the past three years. There are currently no plans to change it.

1069