Purbeck Middle Schools Parents Action Group

Save Our Middle Schools

Information you NEED TO READ BEFORE responding to the proposals-

What ACTION can I take?

If you wish to contribute to this website or just to contact us

Financial Information about the Proposed Changes

The Savings:

DCC assure us that the 'drive' behind this proposal is the problem caused by 'spare capacity' in Purbeck schools. In other words, there are more places available than children to fill them. According to DCC this presents a financial problem whereby it is more expensive to educate a child in Purbeck than in other parts of Dorset.

So, DCC appear to take pride in the fact that their proposals, according to their own predictions, will save a 'massive' £450 000 per year! That, in turn, will present an extra £7-£10 per pupil throughout Dorset. Of course, the proposals do not explain how this figure has been calculated.

BUT, what DCC have not mentioned in the proposal (and we have found out from Accountancy Support at County Hall) is that the average funding per pupil across ALL Education Authorities in England is £4 065.90, whereas funding per pupil in Dorset is £3 799.26. YES, pupils in Dorset are considered, by the government, to be worth £266.64 less than the average child in England! Perhaps, rather than destroying a popular and successful pyramid of schools in Purbeck, DCC should be making far greater representation to the government about 'fairer funding' for pupils in Dorset. After all, Dorset people pay the same rate of tax as those throughout the rest of the country!

Taking this further, Local Authorities then allocate approximately 90% of this into Individual School Budgets (ISB). In Dorset, the average ISB figure is £3 404 per pupil, whereas in Purbeck it is £3 490. So, even with the proposed savings and redistribution of funds around the rest of the county, pupils in Purbeck will still be more expensive than in other parts of Dorset.

DCC are also concerned about schools with 'deficit budgets' and claim that smaller schools in Purbeck are more likely to fall into deficit without this reorganisation. In July 2008 the Chief Financial Officer at DCC reported to cabinet on the matter of deficit and surplus budgets in Dorset schools. Read the full report here.....

Within that report we can see that 4 out of 14 (28%) middle schools had a deficit budget on 31st March 2008, whereas 12 out of 20 (60%) of secondary schools were in the same position. Interestingly, the report also notes the problem of 'surplus budgets' and calculates (on page 5) that 36 schools have deficits, totalling £3 593 037, whereas 143 schools have a surplus budget, totalling £8 914 291.

As schools are allocated budgets according to a DCC formula is there not a stronger argument for adjustments to be made to the formula rather than dismantling our successful and popular pyramid of Purbeck schools?

And, the cost of reorganisation?

On 3rd December 2008, the Director of Children's Services reported to cabinet and recommended that members voted to go to 'public consultation'. In a detailed report he notes the estimated cost of reorganisation into a 2-tier system. What doesn't get reported to the public are set-up costs, including £120 000 for staff retraining, £115 000 for a 'project Manager' over the first two years and £108 000 per annum transport costs with the additional bussing of pupils required under the new system!

Of course, the proposal document made available to the public does not mention the 'estimated' capital cost of £50 - £75 million (To be determined). So, where will that money come from? N.B. It is also worth considering the DCC record on estimating costs of similar projects. See Dorset's Previous Record page, but read the rest of this page first!

Paragraph 3.6 of the DCC Proposal document states......

Building the Schools for the Future

We know we need to invest in our school buildings. The government has launched a number of programmes to help with this including the Primary Capital Programme (PCP), Modernising Schools Grant (MSG) and the Building Schools for the Future Programme (BSF). We need to make sure that the building work that we do provides schools fit for the needs of the 21st century. The Purbeck Review will enable us to make the Purbeck Schools a priority for these funding streams.

This statement suggests that it is necessary for this proposal to go ahead in order to gain funding. That is NOT the case however. Middle Schools (deemed secondary) are also entitled to BSF funding. Read here....

BUT, there are many doubts surrounding the BSF programme and some elements that are NOT MADE CLEAR in the DCC proposals for Purbeck.

What DCC do not tell us is that the following report was submitted to Cabinet in November 2008......(The full report can be accessed via this link - It takes some reading!)

BSF funding is available to Local Authorities in 'waves' and Dorset is currently positioned in waves 13-15.

"Along with all other local authorities allocated to Waves 7-15, Dorset has been invited to resubmit an Expression of Interest for the BSF Programme with a view to entering the programme in an earlier wave. The BSF Programme will be recast on the basis of these submissions in January 2009.

The preferred procurement model for the BSF scheme is a partnership with commercial backers and construction companies known as a Local Education Partnership (LEP). There is a possibility that should Bournemouth and Poole enter Wave 8 with the rest of their estate then a common LEP with Dorset could be developed. This may offer some economies of scale in the legal costs and the tendering process.

As previously, the submission of an Expression of Interest denotes the acceptance of default models of funding and procurement for the BSF scheme. The scheme is based on a ratio of 50:35:15 for the provision of new schools, refurbished schools and some modernisation for the last sector, mostly in the form of ICT. In the case of the 50% for new build it is assumed that the funding model will be based on Private Finance Initiative (PFI). However, of late, some doubt has been raised as to the future of this particular approach to funding capital projects, given the change of the status of the banks who had previously supplied the core capital.

The BSF scheme provides substantial sums to meet the core costs of modernising secondary schools. However, depending on the design and the proposals in the scheme, costs may outweigh the funds provided. Councils entering into this programme do so on the understanding that the funding gap between the cost and the funds provided will be met by the local authority."

Given the current economic climate and DCC's record of overspending (see here) on recent projects we cast grave doubts over the ability of DCC to deliver their proposals at no cost to the council tax payers of Dorset.

So, how have other PFI schemes performed? Vince Cable (Lib Dem. Shadow Chancellor) asked for examples via his blog and the answers make interesting reading Read here.....

The Conservatives have also pledged to cut the BSF budget should they win the next election, something that must cast further doubts in our minds. Read more....   and more......

None of us have a crystal ball, but there is a chance that the Conservatives may win the next election!

Further doubts, even before the next election, about the future of BSF have hit the headlines recently.

"The £45 billion Building Schools for the Future programme, half of which is under PFI, is also facing serious problems finding finance to rebuild or refurbish 3,500 secondary schools."  The Times, 26th January 2009

Problems in finding the necessary private investment are described in 

The Times, article in December 2008 ..... Read here.... 

in The Daily Telegraph on 6th January 2009  Read here.....

 in the Financial Times on 7th January 2009  Read here.....  

and The Times on 26th January 2009 Read here.....

The Guardian on 27th January (Read here....)noted that the Government is considering under-writing 'private finance initiatives' in order to encourage banks to lend to these schemes. So, as taxpayers in Dorset we will help to fund the banks in order for them to lend into BSF and then we will be paying again if the economy dictates that the loans cannot be repaid on time. Then of course, don't forget that we will be footing the bill for any overspend through our council tax!!! Does that sound an attractive offer?