{"id":230936,"date":"2025-06-12T16:18:18","date_gmt":"2025-06-12T15:18:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/?p=230936"},"modified":"2025-06-12T16:18:19","modified_gmt":"2025-06-12T15:18:19","slug":"what-the-spending-review-really-means-for-schools","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/what-the-spending-review-really-means-for-schools\/","title":{"rendered":"What the spending review really means for schools"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The next few years are going to feel very tight for schools. While schools did receive a relatively generous settlement compared with other areas of public spending, familiar pressures from rising costs of SEND, staff costs and falling pupil rolls will weigh heavily on budgets over the next few years.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Day-to-day spending through the core schools budget is set to increase by \u00a34.2 billion in cash terms between 2025-26 and 2028-29.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reverses past per-pupil cuts<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The eagle-eyed reader will note that this is less than the \u00a34.7 billion rise the government claims. This is because the government did not include the \u00a3600 million teacher pay grant going to schools this year in its baseline for school spending.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To calculate the planned change over time in spending, it seems natural to compare the money the government plans to spend in 2028 with the money going to schools this year. So, leaving this out of the baseline is an odd decision \u2013 and one that allows the government to claim a bigger funding rise than schools will end up feeling.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Much will depend on reform of the SEND system\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The planned rise in spending \u2013 based on a more sensible baseline \u2013 amounts to the core schools budget being held constant in real terms, with an extra \u00a3400 million to cover the costs of the planned expansion of free school meals.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because pupil numbers are expected to fall between 2025 and 2028, a real-terms freeze in the schools budget equates to a 3 per cent rise in spending per pupil over the spending review period. Taken together with past rises in spending per pupil since 2019, this more than reverses past cuts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The underlying picture will likely be a lot tighter than that though.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But SEND could wipe out rises<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

There has been a near 80 per cent rise in the number of pupils with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) since 2018, including an 11 per cent rise in the latest statistics<\/a> for January 2025.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This has led to rapid increases in the costs of special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) provision. Indeed, about half of the overall increase in school spending since 2019 has been absorbed by rising SEND costs.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This extra spending is clearly going towards extra provision. However, its overall quality is unclear and its cost-effectiveness very doubtful. Such rapid increases in spending also constrain the resources schools have to deliver their other responsibilities.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The future is likely to be no different. Indeed, the government forecasts that spending on SEND will rise by over \u00a32 billion (in real terms) between 2025 and 2028. If this occurs, then the best schools could hope for is a real-terms freeze in mainstream school funding per pupil between 2025 and 2028.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government plans major reforms to the SEND system. It has allocated \u00a3760 million across 2026 and 2027 to help smooth any reforms. This money will be coming from within the core schools budget.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Things are likely to move slowly. The first proposals won\u2019t appear until the autumn, while actual changes are unlikely before September 2026. Even that is incredibly optimistic. As such, it still seems reasonable to expect large increases in spending on SEND up to 2028.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Schools could afford 2% teacher pay rises<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The most realistic expectation is for a real-terms freeze in existing school funding per pupil. This would likely equate to 2 per cent increases in most funding rates in the national funding formula.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As such, schools would be able to afford pay rises of around 2 per cent. If recommendations are higher than that, schools would either need to reduce non-staff spending or reduce staffing levels in the absence of extra funding.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the long run, it seems reasonable for school costs to broadly fall in line with pupil numbers, undoing the budget increases from the 2010s (when pupil numbers rose).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the short term, though, managing this process will be far from straightforward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Schools, trusts and local authorities will need to work carefully through this challenge over the next few years. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Falling pupil numbers and less need for new schools does mean less need for new school buildings, freeing up more of the schools capital budget for refurbishing or improving existing buildings.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That will be helped by a 7 per cent real-terms increase in school capital spending (rising from \u00a36.8 billion in 2025-26 to \u00a37.7 billion in 2028-29 in cash terms), taking capital spending back to the same real-terms level as in 2015. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Few expected anything other than tight finances moving forward, but just how tight will largely depend on reform of the SEND system. We will have to wait until the autumn to find out more about that. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The next few years are going to be very tight for school budgets, writes Luke Sibieta, and forecasting anything more than a real-terms freeze is highly optimistic\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":73,"featured_media":205100,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[1795],"post-theme":[],"class_list":["post-230936","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-opinion","tag-spending-review"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t