It’s Simple – There isn’t Enough Money in Education
What can the government’s new £2.3 million finance gurus tell school leaders that we don’t already know, asks Rebecca Stacey…
I wasn’t happy to hear that the government is spending £2.3 million on cost-cutting consultants. It was an initiative that was rather quietly announced, without much detail.
Apparently the trial involved employing consultants in schools to show us where we can cost-cut and save money and was deemed a success (although more details of how successful would have been welcome, of course).
I know that £2.3 million is not so much money compared to the savings that could be made in schools. In fact, it’s not much money at all when you look at the total schools budget, or if you divide it up among those schools they are targeting. But the problems I have with this initiative go deeper than purely costs.
Firstly, it seemed like a slap in the face to many of us. Where is this money coming from? How can the government afford to recruit while schools are losing staff? What kinds of message does it give to staff who are facing redundancies or shortened hours?
At a time when schools are asking parents for help with basic supplies it seems to be completely counter-productive. It also sends a message that we, teachers and school leaders, are doing something wrong; something that headteachers up and down the country must have somehow missed.
“Look,” it seems to say. “This is how you balance your budget.” At a time when schools are struggling to get on top of changes to exams, new accountability measures, GDPR and various other top-down initiatives, this seems misguided at best.
At worst, it seems like a cynical political ploy to show that the government knows best.
You see, us headteachers spend time with our governors, SLT and the wider school community to properly resource and fund our schools. We draw up school development plans which supports our communities and work for our pupils. We know what’s best – and if we don’t, then we have bigger issues than financial management.
Dropping in an – albeit knowledgeable and experienced – school finance ‘expert’ will not add anything to this mix, beyond telling us what we already know: there isn’t enough money. Cost cutting at a school level is no longer working for us. There is so little left to cut.
OK, I know what you’re thinking: perhaps these consultants can concentrate on MATs. Maybe these multi-school trusts and federations are missing something. There has to savings to be made across large school families, right? And here, I think, is the problem.
You see, MATs and academies opted out of local government systems. Local councils already have expertise within their systems, or at least they did, and are responsible for their schools financially. Are we now taking that away from LAs?
The remit needs to be made crystal clear. Who does the government intend to target with these consultants? MATs and federations should be taking care of themselves, right?
Speaking as the head of an academy, we need to ensure that the government is not just targeting one type of school. There is a risk of creating a two-tier system and further entrenching the ‘one rule for them’ idea.
Moreover, if a school needs financial advice, it should be available via support systems that are already in place. Are we seriously suggesting that these systems are not available for schools already?
Let’s try a thought experiment and give the government the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps schools will benefit from a thorough financial health check. Maybe savings per pupil across the country can be made.
Perhaps the recruitment will go smoothly and we will have a well trained, empathetic and experienced set of consultants that can support schools. If that is what the government is aiming for, then the money set aside doesn’t seem to be enough.
The government needs to put its money where its mouth is and ensure that all schools, regardless of their governance status, are included and welcome.
The £2.3 million spend will be spread over three years, I believe. If it is really the investment the government says it is, it should be shouting about it from the rooftops.
However, the scale of the project suggests that few schools will actually benefit. If that’s the case, it’s a wasted opportunity as well as a waste of money, which seems to be the biggest shame of all.
Rebecca Stacey is headteacher at Castle Carrock Primary in Brampton, Cumbria. Find her on her website at digitalclassrooms.co.uk and follow her on Twitter at @bekblayton.
