Reino Unido: Funding cuts will strip London schools of their social mobility success

When Nicky Morgan announced a consultation on the new school funding formula, she promised to create a system that would ensure “all children – whatever their background and wherever they live in the country – get a great education.” For headteachers in London and other inner-city areas, there’s a fear this promise will not be fulfilled.

The government’s proposals – which suggest that local authorities will no longer play a role in distributing funding – are lacking in detail. But one thing is clear: unless enough extra money is put into the system, schools in inner-London and other cities are likely to lose out. This will put everything which has supported London schools’ remarkable success stories at risk. These have been against the odds considering the multiple deprivations facing their students: in inner London, 26.4% of students are eligible for free school meals, according to Department for Education figures – far more than other regions.

The funding available to schools in inner London has been essential in allowing headteachers to support pupils from disadvantaged and turbulent homes. It costs far more to ensure that young people who might have been moved from school to school, have low prior attainment and live in poverty, achieve academic success and, of equal importance, have the confidence and self-belief to make the most of those qualifications in the future.

Schools that are catering for large numbers of students with such challenges – and there are many outside urban areas, in coastal towns, for example – need adequate resourcing to ensure this actually happens.

Yes, some of the funding London schools have received may well have supported smaller class sizes and more textbooks but, more importantly, it has allowed us to replicate some of the experiences which make independent schools so successful – and which should be an entitlement for all. Students at my school have access to a rich arts programme, music tuition, debating activites, the Duke of Edinburgh Award as well as partnerships with theatres and galleries. Schools offering an enrichment programme are often the ones that have been most successful in closing the gap between the rich and the poor.

The proposal that any local decision making about school funding should be removed is also worrying. At present, local authorities, through the Schools’ Forum, decide on the best way to allocate funds, depending on local circumstances. The forum has representatives from all stakeholders, with the majority being headteachers and school governors. They are in a unique position to target funding where it is most needed. I have been a head in two London boroughs which, although very close geographically, were very different in terms of pupil population and need: the forum was essential in ensuring funds were appropriately allocated.

In recent years, the government has determined which factors may be used by local authorities to allocate funds and this has given us a taste of the turbulence we might expect in the future. One such example is the use of a postcode-based indicator of deprivation instead of entitlement to free school meals. While this may be a reliable predictor in some neighbourhoods, this is not the case in some urban areas, where there may be a £3m family property next door to a home that is occupied by a number of families who are living in poverty. Free school meals isn’t a perfect indicator of poverty, but it is a far more reliable one than postcode in our context.

The removal of mobility as a determining factor for funding could also have a huge impact: young people who, through no fault of their own, have attended a number of different schools need extra help, and this costs money. This is an issue which affects many inner-London schools.

The ability to allocate funding to meet local needs is critical in terms of improving outcomes for students. There is an assumption in the consultation that all schools within one local authority are, at present, funded at the same level. This is absolutely not the case because it is recognised that those with the most need must be given the most support. Schools within one local authority can and do receive different levels of funding.

We do not yet have the detail of the proposals, but what we do know is that without significant extra funding, there will be winners and losers: London and other urban areas are set to be among the losers. There are schools outside of the inner cities that deserve more funding – but surely it can’t be right to pit schools against each other in the battle for resources? The government is committed to a model of school improvement that is based on schools supporting each other and this has been at the heart of the improvement in London schools. Once we are fighting with each other for funding this will not be possible.

Even without a national funding formula, we are facing significant financial pressures. School funding is at best standing still as employment and other costs rise significantly year on year. The only way to balance the books therefore is fewer staff, leading to larger class sizes, less support outside the classroom, a reduced curriculum offer and lack of enrichment.

Heads across the country are taking tough decisions as we attempt to set our budgets for next year. I want us all to be in a position where we have the necessary resources to maximise the potential of our students. The success of London schools has proved, if nothing else, that if we fund education at the right level, we will get results.