£1,550 A Head At Primary: The Pupil Premium Deadline On 31 December

Picture this. You're sitting at your desk. You open up last year's pupil premium strategy statement. You hit save as. You save it under a new name. And you change the dates to this year. Oh, yeah. I know this routine. And let me guess. You also scroll down and tweak exactly one word in the barrier section just to make sure it looks updated. Exactly. You change a single word in the barrier section. And the file itself, it follows that classic naming convention we all know. Yeah. It starts as strategy statement final.

And then inevitably it becomes final version P. Right. There is always a final version. I mean, there has to be. Always. And if you scroll down to the middle table, the financial figures sitting right there, they are still last year's figures. Because the new allocation letter is just sitting unopened in someone's inbox somewhere. Yes. Completely untouched. Yeah. Now, here's the most important part of this scenario. The person doing this, they're very good at their job. Highly competent. I mean, nobody in this scenario is cheating. Nobody is trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes.

It's just reality. Right. It is the second week of December. This document is just it's merely the fourth thing on a to do list of 11 absolute priorities. Yeah. And everyone in that building assumes they are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Because they meet the deadline. The deadline gets met. This is the education commute. Yeah. So I am sitting in the deputy head's chair today. That's, you know, the chair belonging to the person whose name is actually on that document published on the school website.

Right. And I am in the reader's chair. I've got the conditions of grant open right in front of me, along with the technical note and the Education Endowment Foundation's guide. And looking through all of this, there's a number in here I actually want to challenge you to guess. All right. Go on. Test me. We are talking about the pupil premium for this financial year. Right. Which rate is higher? Is it the amount allocated for a primary school pupil or the amount for a secondary school pupil?

Well, logically, I'd say secondary. I mean, it has to be secondary. You think? Yeah. You've got bigger overall costs. You're dealing with the pressure of exam years. And there's a need for, you know, much more intensive intervention. You would completely think so. But no. Yeah. It's primary. Wait, really? Primary gets the higher rate. Primary gets the higher rate. It is 1 ,550 pounds for a primary pupil. Wow. Okay. Yes. Specifically, a primary pupil on free school meals or recorded as eligible in the past six years.

Right. Now compare that to secondary. It's only 1 ,100 pounds for the equivalent. secondary pupil. Let's just pause on that for a second because I just gave the exact assumption everyone in the sector makes and it's completely backwards. Let's make sure that lands. Absolutely. So it is 1 ,550 pounds at primary. Right. 1 ,550. And it is 1 ,100 pounds at secondary. And then we have the rate for a looked after child or a previously looked after child, meaning a child who has been adopted or is on a guardianship or child arrangements order.

Okay. And what is that one? That rate is 2 ,690 pounds. That is a significant jump. What about service children? For service children, it is 360 pounds. But the key detail there is that this 360 pounds, it's paid on top of any other rate they attract. Oh, I see. But the other rates, they do not stack. Wait, so if a child falls into multiple categories, the funding doesn't compound? No, it doesn't. The Department for Education's exact wording on this is that a pupil recorded as looked after and free school meals eligible, quote, will attract the LAC or PLAC per pupil amount only.

LAC and PLAC being the acronyms for looked after child and previously looked after child. Right. So they get the 2 ,690 pounds, but they do not get the free school meals amount added on top of that. Exactly. Now, let's talk about who actually counts for this funding. Because, you know, it applies from reception all the way up to year 11. Right. And just being on free school meals isn't the whole story, is it? It isn't. No. A pupil counts if they are currently recorded as eligible for free school meals.

Or if they have been recorded as eligible at any point in the past six years. The ever six rule. Yes, that is known as the ever six rule. And in a typical allocation, you know, the ever six rule is doing most of the work. OK, let me make sure I'm following the practical impact of that. A child whose family came off free school meals, say, four years ago, they still bring the money into the school. They still bring the money at the full rate. Wow. Yeah.

As for the service children rule, it applies to a pupil with a serving parent or, and this is a very specific distinction, a parent who died while serving. A parent who died while serving. Somebody wrote that sentence very carefully to ensure those families were caught by the policy. They did. Now, there is one more crucial thing about the shape of this funding, and it fundamentally changes how you should think about that document on your website. Okay. This is a grant with conditions attached. It is not just a slice of the general school budget that you can, you know, use however you see fit.

But we don't put together a bid for it, do we? No, you don't bid for it. The rates are purely formula driven. Right. They are based directly off the census records you have already submitted. You don't ask for the money and you cannot argue the final figure. Which means the only discretion a school actually has is how they choose to use that money once it arrives. The only discretion you have is what you do with it. And the only public account of how you use your discretion is the statement sitting on your school website.

That is a lot of pressure on one document. It is. Now, let's look closely at the rules driving that document, because this is where the December deadline actually comes from. I'm going to read the exact duty from the Department for Education. OK, let's hear it. It says all schools that receive pupil premium must publish a strategy statement by the 31st of December each academic year. Using the template provided. Using the template provided. So compliance isn't just about, I don't know, throwing a couple of paragraphs onto the website and calling it a day.

Exactly. You must use the template provided. The department provides a blank one. And they also provide worked examples tailored specifically for primary, secondary, and special schools. Right. And I want to be absolutely clear on the phrasing here. We never describe that December deadline as statutory. You won't find it in a statute. It is the conditions of grant that require it. Okay. So the conditions of grant required the specific template by December 31st. But earlier you read the quote saying all schools that receive pupil premium. Is it literally every single school?

This is the line I would bet most of your colleagues have never read, and it's fascinating. Oh. The conditions of grant explicitly state that the annual publication duty applies to schools whose allocation is based on more than five eligible pupils. Wait, more than five? Yes. If your allocation is based on five or fewer eligible pupils, you are completely exempt. Wait, seriously. Five or fewer pupils, and you don't have to publish a statement? Five or fewer, and you are exempt. That is incredible. That is a real tiny, highly specific number.

Yeah. I mean, there is undoubtedly somebody in a very small village school out there who has been stressing over this massive template every single December and they legally don't even have to do it. Or, you know, they've been diligently doing it anyway, which is perfectly fine. But it is certainly worth knowing. Which side of the exemption line your school is on before you dedicate your entire December to filling it out? No kidding. So beyond the template and the deadline, what else do the conditions of grant actually dictate about the spending itself?

There are two major conditions. First is what we can call the purpose test. Purpose test. The grant must be spent to achieve the purposes of improving disadvantaged pupils outcomes. Right. That makes sense. Second, the spending has to be on evidence informed activities that are in line with the Department for Education's menu of approaches. A menu of approaches. Does that imply I have to order every single thing on the menu? You don't. The conditions are explicit that schools are not required to use every approach listed. It is meant to be a menu to choose from, not a checklist you have to complete.

OK, I hear everything you're saying. And frankly, all of those requirements sound reasonable on paper. But let me push back here. My issue isn't with the rules. My issue is what the calendar does to the reality of school leadership. How do you mean? Well, it feels like a paperwork complaint driven by the calendar. Think about it. A real school strategy is multi -year. It's deeply ingrained, and it's largely invisible on a day -to -day basis. Sure. But the December deadline is strictly annual, and it is highly visible.

So human nature takes over. The thing that gets managed is the thing that gets seen. Because the deadline is pressing in December, the document itself becomes the strategy. I understand why it feels like a paperwork complaint. But look at the size of the sum. 1 ,550 pounds a head is not a paperwork sum. Sure. If you have a two -form entry primary school and a third of those children are eligible, that school is holding something in the order of a teacher's salary in this grant. Every single year.

Yeah, that's real money. The money is too substantial for this to just be about calendar management. That's a fair point on the finances, but the tension between the multi -year reality and the annual deadline is still there. It is. And the Education Endowment Foundation actually addresses both halves of that exact tension in a single sentence. I'll read you their exact wording. Okay. They say, we recommend a long -term, three -year approach to planning, while schools must still review and publish an updated statement every academic year before December 31st.

So they're acknowledging it directly. A three -year approach, but an annual statement. Three -year approach and annual statement. The key takeaway here is that they are not in conflict. The annual statement is simply meant to be a report on a multi -year strategy that already exists. But you're right about what happens in practice. In a busy December, writing the statement becomes the only moment anyone thinks about it. So the document accidentally becomes the strategy. Right. And to avoid that, the Education Endowment Foundation outlines a process, right?

They have five steps. Yes. Five specific steps in order. Step one, diagnose your pupils' needs. Okay. Step two, use reliable research evidence. Step three, develop your strategy. Step four, deliver and monitor. And step five, evaluate and sustain. If you look at that list, you know, diagnose, use evidence, develop, deliver and monitor, evaluate and sustain. Only one of those steps actually lives anywhere near the month of December. Exactly. Only the Delop step lives near that December publication date. The others are happening year round. OK, but let's be totally honest for a second.

If I spend weeks agonizing over this document to get the template perfect for December, is there any actual proof that a better statement produces better outcomes for these kids? That is the honest concession we have to make today. No. I cannot tell you that a better statement changes outcomes. I looked for the data. No public body publishes figures on late publication. And there is no evidence showing that a better statement produces better outcomes. So what is the actual takeaway for a school leader? The actual homework is reading last year's statement to see if it actually works for your school.

And this is where we have to look at how this plays out across three different rooms, primary, secondary, and specialist settings. Let's start in the primary room. In a primary setting, remember, the money is at its largest per child, 1 ,550 pounds. Right. The eligible group is often equivalent to a whole class's worth of children spread across seven -year groups. In this room, the diagnosed step is the one that really pays off. How so? You are looking for which children have which need. and specifically finding the same need appearing in three -year groups at once.

That makes sense. By diagnosing a shared need across year groups, you can pool that higher funding effectively. Now contrast that with the secondary room. In secondary, the rate is lower per child, 1 ,100 pounds, but the cohort is much bigger. Yeah, much bigger. The temptation here is to create a very long list of small interventions. Each one looks defensible on its own, but there are so many that nobody can actually evaluate them. So in secondary, it's not the diagnosis step, but the evaluate and sustain step that pays off.

Yes. It's about having the discipline to state clearly what you stopped doing this year and why you stopped it. Okay. That makes sense. Finally, we step into the specialist room where the arithmetic changes entirely. The rate for looked after and previously looked after children is 2 ,690 pounds. Right. In a specialist setting, that specific group often makes up a much larger share of the school role than it does anywhere else. So the strategy question fundamentally shifts. It does. The specialist question stops being, you know, what intervention do we run and becomes, what does this higher rate buy that the place isn't already required to provide?

That is a much harder question to answer, but it's a completely fair one to be asked. So let's bring this back to the reality of the school building. Tomorrow. At break time, if you ask whoever is standing next to the kettle, could they name one single thing the pupil premium strategy says the school does without looking it up? And here is the bigger test. If a governor walked into the school today, asked to see the statement, and then asked which of the five steps the school actually did this year, could you name more than one?

If you're listening to this and hesitating, the fix is actually very straightforward. Open last year's statement now. Do it today while there is no December deadline pressing down on you. Right, without the pressure. Mark the parts of the document you cannot defend. Whatever is left unmarked, that is your real strategy. All right, let's pull everything together. We have four key things to take away off the drive today. Number one, the rates. It is 1 ,550 pounds for a primary pupil, 1 ,100 pounds for a secondary pupil, 2 ,690 pounds for looked after and previously looked after children.

and 360 pounds for service children, which is paid on top. Number two, the duty. You must publish a strategy statement by the thummy 1st of December each academic year using the template provided. That's the blank template plus worked examples for primary, secondary, and special schools. Number three, the exemption nobody ever quotes. The annual publication duty applies to schools whose allocation is based on more than five eligible pupils. Yeah. If your allocation is based on five or fewer pupils, you are completely exempt. And number four, the line from the Education Endowment Foundation, the three year approach republished annually.

There are five steps and only one of those steps actually happens in December. Right. If the statement is the only time the strategy exists, the deadline has quietly replaced the work. Everything we've discussed is linked in the show notes. Remember, we're the trailer, not the film. Safe trip in. See you at the gates.