Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what recent estimate he has made of the number of children receiving unregistered alternative education provision.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The information is not held centrally.
Data on alternative provision (AP) is collected by the Department in two ways. The school census collects details of those pupils in pupil referral units, AP academies and AP free schools. This provision is commissioned by local authorities and includes pupils who may be dual-registered with an AP provider and a mainstream school. The school census is a statutory requirement and is collected three times a year (termly, in October, January and May).
The AP census collects details on pupil placements in AP settings where a local authority is paying full tuition fees. This includes independent schools, further education colleges offering pre-16 provision and unregistered settings.
However, neither the school census nor the AP census collect details on pupils placed in unregistered settings funded directly by schools.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the letter of 20 May 2019 from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the School System to the Education Select Committee, how many requests for the publication of multi-academy trust improvement plans his Department has (a) received and (b) agreed; and which improvement plans have been published in (i) full and (ii) part as a result of those requests.
Answered by Nadhim Zahawi
The information is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Further to my noble friend, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State’s letter to the Education Select Committee, dated 20 May 2019, we would note that where the department intervenes, we work with each trust to put in place a recovery process that underpins education provision with strong financial management and oversight.
These plans and our support for trusts are flexible and will evolve as the trusts recover and to respond to any future challenges. Any request to disclose an improvement plan is responded to on a case-by-case basis.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, where the £930, 000 of non-recoverable funding in 2016-17 and 2017-18 for Academies Enterprise Trust has been allocated.
Answered by Nadhim Zahawi
The department can confirm that Academies Enterprise Trust (AET) used their funding in 2016-17 and 2017-18 for administration costs, such as the £930,000 non-recoverable funding being spent for central office staff redundancies and project management costs to transfer 4 academies to other academy trusts. The £3.58 million recoverable funding was spent towards academy level restructuring to reduce operational costs and support the trust’s reserves following the financial impact of transferring Cordeaux, Millbrook, Swallow Hill and Everest academies out of AET, and closing down Sandown Bay.
As a result of these restructurings, we expect AET to achieve an operational surplus in the financial year ending 31 August 2019.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what the £3.58 million recoverable funding in 2016-17 and 2017-18 allocated to Academies Enterprise Trust has funded.
Answered by Nadhim Zahawi
The department can confirm that Academies Enterprise Trust (AET) used their funding in 2016-17 and 2017-18 for administration costs, such as the £930,000 non-recoverable funding being spent for central office staff redundancies and project management costs to transfer 4 academies to other academy trusts. The £3.58 million recoverable funding was spent towards academy level restructuring to reduce operational costs and support the trust’s reserves following the financial impact of transferring Cordeaux, Millbrook, Swallow Hill and Everest academies out of AET, and closing down Sandown Bay.
As a result of these restructurings, we expect AET to achieve an operational surplus in the financial year ending 31 August 2019.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what estimate his Department has made of the number of private voluntary and independent childcare settings in each local authority area.
Answered by Nadhim Zahawi
This is a matter for Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, Amanda Spielman. I have asked her to write to the hon. Member for Manchester Central and a copy of her reply will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if he will list for each multi-academy trust that has had deficit funding approved (a) the amount of funding approved, (b) whether it is linked to a financial turnaround plan, (c) the period it covers, (d) the date on which it was approved by the Education and Skills Funding Agency or the Department and (e) the amount that is recoverable and non-recoverable in each case.
Answered by Nadhim Zahawi
Academy trusts have primary responsibility for their own financial affairs and where the Education and Skills Funding Agency intervene, we work with each trust to put in place a recovery process that underpins education provision with strong financial management and oversight. This can include the provision of deficit funding, issuing a financial notice to improve or, in the most serious cases, termination of the Funding Agreement.
Where we have provided deficit funding as part of this process, this information is reflected in trusts’ accounts. Attached is a document setting out deficit funding information for the most recent year available, financial year 2017-18. The department records deficit funding by the academy that funding is associated with and this is also reflected in the attached document.
As of March 2018, the total number of academies for which deficit funding was agreed in financial year 2017-18, reflects less than 1% of all open academies, and less than 0.2% of the total funding allocated to academies for the 2017-18 academic year.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 14 May 2019 to Question 251405, how many children classified as in scope for the 16-18 maths progress measure were from (a) disadvantaged and (b) non-disadvantaged backgrounds; and whether those children (i) did not enter an approved qualification and (ii) made positive progress in 2017-18.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 Maths measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status[1] and prior attainment[2], can be found in tables 1-4, attached. These figures are for 2017/18. This expands on published data within the Department’s statistical release, available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/a-level-and-other-16-to-18-results-2017-to-2018-revised.
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 maths and English progress measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status, prior attainment, and the type of qualification the student sat in their KS4 study[3], [4] are available in tables 5-8, attached. These figures are for 2017/18.
Disaggregating the published figures has necessitated a slightly different methodology to calculate the number of students with positive progress. In some cases this leads to a negligible difference when totals are compared to the published data within the Department’s statistical release[5].
For figures in 2016/17, tables 1-8 have been replicated in tables 9-16, attached.
[1] Disadvantage status is taken from the census recorded completed for that student’s final year of key stage 4 study.
[2] In previous PQs 251400–251406, prior attainment was given based on three groups (‘entry level or fail’, ‘below grade 3/D’ and ‘grade 3/D’). In the attached tables with information relating to prior attainment points, these points are based on the student’s highest prior attainment in mathematics or English. ‘Entry level or fail’ is synonymous with points 0 and 0.4. ‘Below grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 0.8–3.0. ‘Grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 4.0. This is the case for all the tables provided.
[3] ‘GCSE or equivalent’ includes students whose highest prior attainment were in a GCSE, International GCSE or level 2 certificate. Qualifications are included in this group because they are all similarly graded on a 9-1 or A*-G scale and are included as part of the condition for funding calculations. ‘Other level 2 qualifications’ includes students whose highest prior attainment was in any other level 2 qualification. This includes level 2 functional skills and free standing maths that are included as part of the condition of funding calculations. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
[4] The methodology used means that for a small number of students any entries into maths during their 16-18 study which did not reach the grade 4/C threshold (leaving them in scope), may have led to their prior attainment being reclassified. This will have had no noticeable effect on the overall figures. Due to the methodology used to assign points to English literature and language, a small number of students may be assigned to a different qualification type. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 14 May 2019 to Question 251405, how many children classified as in scope for the 16-18 maths progress measure were from (a) disadvantaged and (b) non-disadvantaged backgrounds by prior attainment points from 0 to 3; and whether those children (i) did not enter an approved qualification and (ii) made positive progress in 2017-18.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 Maths measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status[1] and prior attainment[2], can be found in tables 1-4, attached. These figures are for 2017/18. This expands on published data within the Department’s statistical release, available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/a-level-and-other-16-to-18-results-2017-to-2018-revised.
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 maths and English progress measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status, prior attainment, and the type of qualification the student sat in their KS4 study[3], [4] are available in tables 5-8, attached. These figures are for 2017/18.
Disaggregating the published figures has necessitated a slightly different methodology to calculate the number of students with positive progress. In some cases this leads to a negligible difference when totals are compared to the published data within the Department’s statistical release[5].
For figures in 2016/17, tables 1-8 have been replicated in tables 9-16, attached.
[1] Disadvantage status is taken from the census recorded completed for that student’s final year of key stage 4 study.
[2] In previous PQs 251400–251406, prior attainment was given based on three groups (‘entry level or fail’, ‘below grade 3/D’ and ‘grade 3/D’). In the attached tables with information relating to prior attainment points, these points are based on the student’s highest prior attainment in mathematics or English. ‘Entry level or fail’ is synonymous with points 0 and 0.4. ‘Below grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 0.8–3.0. ‘Grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 4.0. This is the case for all the tables provided.
[3] ‘GCSE or equivalent’ includes students whose highest prior attainment were in a GCSE, International GCSE or level 2 certificate. Qualifications are included in this group because they are all similarly graded on a 9-1 or A*-G scale and are included as part of the condition for funding calculations. ‘Other level 2 qualifications’ includes students whose highest prior attainment was in any other level 2 qualification. This includes level 2 functional skills and free standing maths that are included as part of the condition of funding calculations. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
[4] The methodology used means that for a small number of students any entries into maths during their 16-18 study which did not reach the grade 4/C threshold (leaving them in scope), may have led to their prior attainment being reclassified. This will have had no noticeable effect on the overall figures. Due to the methodology used to assign points to English literature and language, a small number of students may be assigned to a different qualification type. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answers of 14 May 2019 to Question 251405 and Question 251401, if he will publish that data by (a) GCSE or international GCSE qualification at (i) grade 2/E, (ii) grade F, (iii) grade 1/G and (iv) grade fail and (b) any other qualification at (v) level 1 qualification, (vi) entry level and (vii) fail in 2017-18.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 Maths measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status[1] and prior attainment[2], can be found in tables 1-4, attached. These figures are for 2017/18. This expands on published data within the Department’s statistical release, available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/a-level-and-other-16-to-18-results-2017-to-2018-revised.
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 maths and English progress measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status, prior attainment, and the type of qualification the student sat in their KS4 study[3], [4] are available in tables 5-8, attached. These figures are for 2017/18.
Disaggregating the published figures has necessitated a slightly different methodology to calculate the number of students with positive progress. In some cases this leads to a negligible difference when totals are compared to the published data within the Department’s statistical release[5].
For figures in 2016/17, tables 1-8 have been replicated in tables 9-16, attached.
[1] Disadvantage status is taken from the census recorded completed for that student’s final year of key stage 4 study.
[2] In previous PQs 251400–251406, prior attainment was given based on three groups (‘entry level or fail’, ‘below grade 3/D’ and ‘grade 3/D’). In the attached tables with information relating to prior attainment points, these points are based on the student’s highest prior attainment in mathematics or English. ‘Entry level or fail’ is synonymous with points 0 and 0.4. ‘Below grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 0.8–3.0. ‘Grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 4.0. This is the case for all the tables provided.
[3] ‘GCSE or equivalent’ includes students whose highest prior attainment were in a GCSE, International GCSE or level 2 certificate. Qualifications are included in this group because they are all similarly graded on a 9-1 or A*-G scale and are included as part of the condition for funding calculations. ‘Other level 2 qualifications’ includes students whose highest prior attainment was in any other level 2 qualification. This includes level 2 functional skills and free standing maths that are included as part of the condition of funding calculations. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
[4] The methodology used means that for a small number of students any entries into maths during their 16-18 study which did not reach the grade 4/C threshold (leaving them in scope), may have led to their prior attainment being reclassified. This will have had no noticeable effect on the overall figures. Due to the methodology used to assign points to English literature and language, a small number of students may be assigned to a different qualification type. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 14 May 2019 to Question 251405 and Question 251401 on Mathematics: Education, for that data for the year 2016-2017.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 Maths measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status[1] and prior attainment[2], can be found in tables 1-4, attached. These figures are for 2017/18. This expands on published data within the Department’s statistical release, available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/a-level-and-other-16-to-18-results-2017-to-2018-revised.
The number of state-funded students in scope for the 16-18 maths and English progress measures and their attainment, split by disadvantage status, prior attainment, and the type of qualification the student sat in their KS4 study[3], [4] are available in tables 5-8, attached. These figures are for 2017/18.
Disaggregating the published figures has necessitated a slightly different methodology to calculate the number of students with positive progress. In some cases this leads to a negligible difference when totals are compared to the published data within the Department’s statistical release[5].
For figures in 2016/17, tables 1-8 have been replicated in tables 9-16, attached.
[1] Disadvantage status is taken from the census recorded completed for that student’s final year of key stage 4 study.
[2] In previous PQs 251400–251406, prior attainment was given based on three groups (‘entry level or fail’, ‘below grade 3/D’ and ‘grade 3/D’). In the attached tables with information relating to prior attainment points, these points are based on the student’s highest prior attainment in mathematics or English. ‘Entry level or fail’ is synonymous with points 0 and 0.4. ‘Below grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 0.8–3.0. ‘Grade 3 or D’ is synonymous with points 4.0. This is the case for all the tables provided.
[3] ‘GCSE or equivalent’ includes students whose highest prior attainment were in a GCSE, International GCSE or level 2 certificate. Qualifications are included in this group because they are all similarly graded on a 9-1 or A*-G scale and are included as part of the condition for funding calculations. ‘Other level 2 qualifications’ includes students whose highest prior attainment was in any other level 2 qualification. This includes level 2 functional skills and free standing maths that are included as part of the condition of funding calculations. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.
[4] The methodology used means that for a small number of students any entries into maths during their 16-18 study which did not reach the grade 4/C threshold (leaving them in scope), may have led to their prior attainment being reclassified. This will have had no noticeable effect on the overall figures. Due to the methodology used to assign points to English literature and language, a small number of students may be assigned to a different qualification type. This is the case for tables 5-8 and 13-16.