Over the summer 2010 the DfE published the results of the March 2010 consultation into school funding which showed a high level of concern over plans to mainstream the EMA grant into the DSG.
Within the March consultation, the Labour government had suggested mainstreaming the EMA grant but had pledged both to maintain the level of funding EAL/EMA funding overall and to ensure that ‘Local authorities should also be able to retain a portion of this funding to run a centralised service to support schools in narrowing achievement gaps for under-performing pupils and meeting the specific needs of bilingual learners, where they consider that is more practical than delegating all the funding to schools’.
The results of the consultation showed that whilst a large majority supported the case for mainstreaming grants as a way of simplifying the funding system, both in terms of increasing its transparency and reducing its bureaucracy, 'there were particular concerns around the proposals to mainstream individual grants' particularly EMAG.
Whilst some welcomed the proposed flexibilities to allow LAs to retain a portion of EMA funding to run centralised services, 'others suggested that EMAG funding should be exempt from mainstreaming on the basis that there is a lack of a framework of accountability for LAs and schools in this area; that mainstreaming would diminish the focus on work supported by this specific funding stream, and that the existence of certain specific services (such as the Travellers’ Education Service) was threatened by the proposals'.
A number of respondents commented on the need to maintain central specialised services in the LA and there was general support for transitional arrangements to ease the impact of the mainstreaming of these grants. Respondents also argued that 'EMAG should be retained as a discrete grant – at least for an interim period.'
The incoming government launched its own consultation on school funding including the pupil premium and other funding issues in July 2010 : Consultation on school funding 2011-12 Introducing a pupil premium
This document made clear that plans to review English school funding including the introduction of 'Additional Educational Needs' to cover the needs of EAL and ethnic minority pupils had been halted. However it was indicated that a new system for funding to follow 'pupil characteristics more closely' would be looked at for beyond 2011-2012.
The July consultation noted that the mainstreaming of grants would go ahead
‘We intend to mainstream relevant grants into the DSG, which is likely to include at least School Development Grant, School Standards Grant and School Standards Grant (Personalisation), but again this is subject to the spending review. This is consistent with the Government’s aim of moving to a simpler funding system. Local authorities will be allowed to use previous levels of grant as an allowable factor in local formulae to help prevent funding turbulence at school level’
It was clear to NALDIC members that mainstreaming EMA funding prior to a thorough review of 'pupil characteristics' would be disastrous and would leave important work with EAL and ethnic minority pupils at great risk. NALDIC therefore urged members to respond strongly to the consultation, publishing a briefing paper to support their responses.
The briefing paper highlighted the following issues:
- The Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant accounts for over £200 million and has for some years been distributed on a needs based formula basis.
- EMAG is a hugely important grant which has led to improving outcomes for groups of learners at risk of underachieving.
- The grant is also the main mechanism for funding the employment of over 3,500 highly skilled specialist EAL andEMA teachers and over 3000 specialist EMA support assistants (DCSF, 2008).
NALDIC was concerned that, faced with uncertainties, a number of local authorities were taking steps to make centrally employed specialist EAL/EMA and GRT teachers redundant. Such actions risked the educational chances of a new generation of learners and the loss of the gains which have been made in recent years to promote the equitable attainment of all our learners.
We therefore urged all colleagues to respond to the consultation in the following way:
It is essential that the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant is retained in its current form at least until the government has completed its review of the system for funding schools beyond 2011-12. Taking immediate steps to ‘mainstream’ EMAG will not support the government’s aim of ensuring ‘funding reflects pupil characteristics more closely’ and jeopardises the academic progress and well being of many of our most vulnerable learners.
Despite strong protests from around the country, Michael Gove announced in a letter to schools and local authorities (27.10.10) that the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant would be mainstreamed to schools. He announced that the EMA grant, along with other grants 'will still go to schools, but the ringfences will be removed so that head teachers have complete freedom over how this money is spent, consistent with our determination that teachers and head teachers should be free from centrally dictated bureaucracy'.
NALDIC remains very disappointed and disturbed by this development. Whilst colleagues in schools will recognise that 'ring-fencing' was a somewhat elastic term, the notional ring fence on this grant meant that schools in England were obliged to demonstrate that the additional funding provided was directed towards the needs of bilingual learners and those from minority ethnic backgrounds at risk of underachievement. To remove this ring fence in its entirety seemed to run counter to the government's determination, reiterated in Michael Gove's letter, 'to protect frontline services and to provide help for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in our society'.
NALDIC remains concerned that the move is likely to mean a decrease in specialist teaching posts to support the language development of England's 900,000 bilingual learners and an end to many useful projects to support the achievement of black and minority ethnic learners. The end to this ring fencing is also likely to mean the reduction or abolition of central support services providing valuable support to schools. With the changes proposed to both the OFSTED inspection regime and the public sector equality duties, it is difficult to see what safeguards remain for ensuring that black and bilingual young people get a 'fair' deal from the English education system. The 900,000 bilingual learners in our schools and their parents will no doubt be reassured to know that there is now no 'centrally dictated bureaucracy' requiring that their needs are met within the system.
A Freedom of Information request from NALDIC to the DfE revealed that NALDIC was not alone in expressing deep concern at the prospect of EMA funding being mainstreamed to schools and the lack of consideration of EAL/EMA issues in the pupil premium arrangements. Responses revealed that many organisations and individuals were appalled that ring fences around the funding were to be removed whilst clear barriers to attainment still exist for many groups of pupils. For example, one influential organisation noted that:
‘According to PANDA/ RAISEonline 2005-2010 the percentage of minority ethnic pupils in schools has continued to rise rapidly from in primary 17.2% in 2004 to 24.5% in 2009 whilst the proportion for whom English is an additional language has nearly doubled from 8.4% in 2004 to 15.3% in 2009. In secondary schools, the percentage of minority ethnic pupils has risen from 18.5% in 2004 to 20.6% in 2009 and the proportion for whom English is an additional language from 8.6% in 2004 to 11.4% in 2009. Attainment indicators in English, mathematics and science at Key Stage 1, 2 and 3 over this period show that pupils for whom English is a first language consistently outperform their peers for whom English is an additional language in all three core subjects in these Key Stages. The overwhelming focus of the pupil premium is on the link between deprivation and achievement and there is no reference to the links between ethnicity / EAL and achievement’.
Despite these concerns, the government remains committed to the policy of mainstreaming the EMA grant and allowing schools complete freedom over its use. The government did however retain the Labour pledge to allow local authorities to retain funding to continue to run centralised EMAG services in cases where local school forums consider that this would be appropriate.
This proposal was made within the school finance regulations for 2011-12:
‘If the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant (EMAG) is mainstreamed into DSG, then we would propose to enable LAs to retain funding centrally within DSG for services which support schools in narrowing achievement gaps for under-performing ethnic groups and in meeting the specific needs of bilingual learners. This would enable LAs to maintain existing services if they wished, including in those areas with small numbers of such pupils and where it is consequently more cost-effective to run a central service than to spread funding thinly. Again, schools forums should be involved in the decision. The revised wording is at Schedule 2 paragraph 39.’
The proposal was accepted and the School Finance Regulations have been amended to:
'enable LAs to retain funding centrally within DSG for services which support schools in narrowing achievement gaps for under-performing ethnic groups and in meeting the specific needs of bilingual learners. This would enable LAs to continue services funded wholly or partly from the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant'.
Details of these regulations can be downloaded from http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/guf%20calculations%20and%20dsg%20allocation%20methodology.pdf
Whilst some local LA services have used these regulations to secure funding to fully maintain their service, regrettably the clarification was too little and too late to save many central local authority EAL services and hundreds of specialist teaching positions.
