Recommendations & Conclusions
29 items
2
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted in Part
Effective recovery relies on pupils being at school but absence is higher than it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among disadvantaged pupils. In the autumn and spring terms of 2021/22, the average absence rate for all pupils was 7.4%, compared with 4.5% for the same terms before the pandemic …
Read more
Effective recovery relies on pupils being at school but absence is higher than it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among disadvantaged pupils. In the autumn and spring terms of 2021/22, the average absence rate for all pupils was 7.4%, compared with 4.5% for the same terms before the pandemic in 2018/19. For disadvantaged pupils, the rate was 10.4% in 2021/22, compared with 7.2% in 2018/19. The Department says that attendance rates are improving as levels of illness reduce. It is trying to tackle pupil absence in several ways, with leadership being provided by the Attendance Action Alliance which brings together stakeholders from across the school system. The Department believes it has set strong expectations and made clear that responsibility for attendance is shared between parents, schools and local authorities. It is collecting better data, drawn directly from schools’ own systems, which it can look at in detail in real time. It also provides data back to schools to allow them to benchmark themselves against other schools. Recommendation 2: The Department should develop a better understanding of why disadvantaged pupils have higher rates of absence than others and, in addition to its ongoing work on attendance, take targeted action to reduce absence rates among disadvantaged pupils.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government accepts the recommendation to develop a better understanding of why disadvantaged pupils have higher absence rates, committing to build on existing analysis by July 2024. However, it disagrees with the need for *new* targeted action, stating that comprehensive measures and existing programmes (like …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
3
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
We share the Department’s disappointment that 13% of schools did not take up the National Tutoring Programme in 2021/22, meaning pupils at these schools missed out on the benefits of subsidised tutoring. Take-up of the two centrally run National Tutoring Programme schemes was below the Department’s expectations, but the introduction …
Read more
We share the Department’s disappointment that 13% of schools did not take up the National Tutoring Programme in 2021/22, meaning pupils at these schools missed out on the benefits of subsidised tutoring. Take-up of the two centrally run National Tutoring Programme schemes was below the Department’s expectations, but the introduction of a school-led tutoring element gave schools more control and significantly boosted take-up. In 2021/22, 87% of schools in England participated in some form of tutoring under the National Tutoring Programme, but the Department described the fact that 13% of schools had not taken part as the “biggest disappointment” of the recovery programme. The Department says it has put a good deal of resource into persuading schools of the benefits of the National Tutoring Programme. The Department added that there was continuing evaluation of the 6 Education recovery in schools in England National Tutoring Programme to ensure tutoring was delivering the best value for money, and that it had committed to investigate how it could further develop longitudinal studies. Recommendation 3: The Department needs to do more to understand why some schools are not taking part in the National Tutoring Programme and take more effective action to increase participation, informed by evaluation of the first two years of the scheme.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government accepts the recommendation to increase participation in the National Tutoring Programme, stating it has simplified the programme, increased the subsidy rate to 50% for 2023-24, and will use administrative data and ongoing evaluation to understand barriers by August 2024.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
4
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
We are not confident that schools will be able to afford to provide tutoring on the scale required to support all the pupils who need it once the Department withdraws its subsidy. By the end of 2021/22, pupils had started 2.5 million courses under the National Tutoring Programme. The Department …
Read more
We are not confident that schools will be able to afford to provide tutoring on the scale required to support all the pupils who need it once the Department withdraws its subsidy. By the end of 2021/22, pupils had started 2.5 million courses under the National Tutoring Programme. The Department made available funding of £594 million to subsidise the cost of tutoring in that period. But it is reducing its subsidy for tutoring under the National Tutoring Programme each year, with the result that the rate of subsidy will drop from 75% in 2020/21 to 25% in 2023/24. After that, schools will have to cover the full cost of tutoring from other sources, such as pupil premium funding. School budgets are already under significant pressure. Written evidence submitted to us shows that some schools are struggling to fund the cost of tutoring in 2022/23, when the Department is still providing a 60% subsidy. The Department wants tutoring to become an integral part of the school system, but it is clear that without extra funding schools will find it difficult to maintain tutoring on a comparable scale to that currently being provided. The Department has committed to model the impact of removing the subsidy on the affordability of tutoring for schools. Recommendation 4: The Department should monitor how much tutoring is being provided, in 2022/23 and 2023/24 when it is providing a subsidy, and in subsequent years, and intervene if tutoring levels drop significantly.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with Recommendation 4, committing to monitor tutoring volumes via school census and year-end statements, develop interventions for significant drops, and has already increased the 2023-24 subsidy rate from 25% to 50% to improve programme deliverability.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
5
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Not Addressed
The Department has no interim targets to track progress towards the 2030 attainment ambitions set out in the Schools White Paper. The Department has not specified the impact it wants to achieve from its interventions to support education recovery because it regards these as part of its wider efforts to …
Read more
The Department has no interim targets to track progress towards the 2030 attainment ambitions set out in the Schools White Paper. The Department has not specified the impact it wants to achieve from its interventions to support education recovery because it regards these as part of its wider efforts to improve pupils’ attainment. In the March 2022 Schools White Paper, the Department set ambitions for pupils’ attainment, by 2030, in literacy and numeracy at the end of primary school and secondary school, but it has not yet set milestones to show progress towards these ambitions. It plans to make public, in the next couple of months, its plans for tracking progress made by primary school pupils. The Department pointed to its Outcome Delivery Plan as the means by which it publishes the performance metrics that measure progress. We note, however, that the most recent Outcome Delivery Plan dates from July 2021, nearly two years ago, meaning that the Department has not provided updated metrics since then. Recommendation 5: The Department should set out measures of progress for the 2030 attainment targets (starting with the measures for primary pupils which it should publish by the 2023 summer parliamentary recess) and report progress against the measures to Parliament each year. Education recovery in schools in England 7 1 Supporting disadvantaged and vulnerable pupils
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government response provided addresses a different set of recommendations from the Public Accounts Committee concerning investment, and therefore does not engage with the substance of the recommendation regarding education attainment targets.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
1
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Not Addressed
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Department for Education (the Department) on education recovery in schools.2
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges that the Committee took evidence from the Department for Education about education recovery in schools based on a report by the National Audit Office.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
6
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Evidence submissions from the Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition, Young Minds and Adoption UK highlighted the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had had on young people’s mental health.10 The Department agreed with Young Minds’ recommendation calling for a whole-school approach to mental health and wellbeing, and said that …
Read more
Evidence submissions from the Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition, Young Minds and Adoption UK highlighted the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had had on young people’s mental health.10 The Department agreed with Young Minds’ recommendation calling for a whole-school approach to mental health and wellbeing, and said that this was important because of the range of different needs. It told us that, with the funding currently available, its ambition was for its programme of mental health support teams to reach 35% of schools and that it was on track to achieve this.11 Closing the disadvantage gap
Show less
HM Treasury
7
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
Disadvantaged pupils have, on average, lower attainment than other pupils, and results from the Key Stage 1, 2 and 4 tests taken in 2022 showed that this disadvantage gap had grown.12 The Department told us that it had been successfully closing the disadvantage gap before the COVID-19 pandemic, and that …
Read more
Disadvantaged pupils have, on average, lower attainment than other pupils, and results from the Key Stage 1, 2 and 4 tests taken in 2022 showed that this disadvantage gap had grown.12 The Department told us that it had been successfully closing the disadvantage gap before the COVID-19 pandemic, and that the subsequent widening of the gap had been one of the worst and most dispiriting effects of the pandemic. It explained that it used a metric called the disadvantage gap index to measure the difference in attainment between disadvantaged pupils and their peers. A value of zero would indicate there was no disadvantage gap. The disadvantage gap index at Key Stage 2 (the end of primary school) was 3.34 in 2011, and the index fell steadily to 2.90 in 2018. In 2022, it had risen to 3.23, not quite as high as in 2011 but going significantly backwards.13 Written evidence we received from NASUWT, Action Tutoring and The Tutor Trust also highlighted that the growth in the attainment gap between disadvantaged and other pupils during the COVID-19 pandemic was a particular concern.14
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the implied recommendation, stating that narrowing the disadvantage gap is central to all existing departmental programmes rather than requiring a separate plan. It highlights ongoing £5 billion recovery programmes, the Schools White Paper, and a commitment to continue reviewing progress.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
8
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
We asked the Department when we would see the disadvantage gap start to close. The Department insisted that closing the gap in attainment had been the relentless focus of its education recovery work, and that almost every element of the recovery programme, including the National Tutoring Programme and the recovery …
Read more
We asked the Department when we would see the disadvantage gap start to close. The Department insisted that closing the gap in attainment had been the relentless focus of its education recovery work, and that almost every element of the recovery programme, including the National Tutoring Programme and the recovery premium, had been tilted towards disadvantaged pupils. It also said that while another important part of the recovery programme, investment in teacher education and training, benefited every pupil, good-quality teaching benefited disadvantaged pupils the most.15
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the implied recommendation, stating that narrowing the disadvantage gap is central to all existing departmental programmes rather than requiring a separate plan. It highlights ongoing £5 billion recovery programmes, the Schools White Paper, and a commitment to continue reviewing progress.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
9
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
The Department told us that it hoped to see the disadvantage gap narrowing again from summer 2023.16 It accepted that one could always do more, but believed it now had a strong package of measures in place. The measures included things that were most likely to drive engagement from all …
Read more
The Department told us that it hoped to see the disadvantage gap narrowing again from summer 2023.16 It accepted that one could always do more, but believed it now had a strong package of measures in place. The measures included things that were most likely to drive engagement from all pupils and particularly disadvantaged pupils. The Department also said that the way it had incentivised teachers to work in the most disadvantaged places was an important part of its efforts to close the disadvantage gap.17
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government disagrees with the committee's conclusion (which they perceived as a recommendation) about the Department's hopes for narrowing the disadvantage gap, reaffirming its commitment to doing so as quickly as possible through current programmes.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
10
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
We pressed the Department on when it hoped to eliminate the disadvantage gap completely. It told us that no country in the world had completely eliminated its 10 ERS0003 The Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition page 1; ERS0005 Young Minds pages 1–3; ERS0006 Adoption UK pages 2 and …
Read more
We pressed the Department on when it hoped to eliminate the disadvantage gap completely. It told us that no country in the world had completely eliminated its 10 ERS0003 The Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition page 1; ERS0005 Young Minds pages 1–3; ERS0006 Adoption UK pages 2 and 4 11 Qq 60, 62 12 C&AG’s Report, para 3.16 13 Q 28 14 ERS0001 NASUWT, the Teacher’s Union, pages 2–3; ERS0002 Action Tutoring, pages 2–3; ERS0007 The Tutor Trust, pages 2–3 15 Q 28 16 Q 28 17 Qq 29–30 Education recovery in schools in England 9 disadvantage gap so it was reluctant to commit to a date. However, the Department said that it should be able to reduce the disadvantage gap at least as quickly as it had done in the 10 years before the COVID-19 pandemic, and that it ought to set itself the challenge of going as fast, or faster, in closing the gap as it had done previously.18 We note, however, that this would mean potentially taking as much as another decade to get back to the position before the pandemic. Pupils’ absence from school
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government disagrees with the committee's implied challenge to reduce the disadvantage gap faster, stating its commitment to narrowing the gap as quickly as possible through existing programmes and the Schools White Paper, rather than a separate plan.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
11
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted in Part
The Department recognises that a key element of improving attainment is for children to be in school.19 Rates of pupil absence from school are, however, higher than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic.20 Written evidence we received from Action Tutoring pointed to increases in pupil absence since before the pandemic, …
Read more
The Department recognises that a key element of improving attainment is for children to be in school.19 Rates of pupil absence from school are, however, higher than they were before the COVID-19 pandemic.20 Written evidence we received from Action Tutoring pointed to increases in pupil absence since before the pandemic, and highlighted the stark gap in attendance between disadvantaged pupils and their peers.21 In the autumn and spring terms of 2021/22, the average absence rate for all pupils was 7.4%, compared with 4.5% for the same terms before the pandemic in 2018/19. For disadvantaged pupils, the rate was 10.4% in 2021/22, compared with 7.2% in 2018/19.22
Show less
Government response AI summary
While the committee's item is a conclusion on the high rates of pupil absence, especially among disadvantaged pupils, the government's response commits to developing a better understanding of absence rates among disadvantaged pupils by July 2024. It also states existing comprehensive measures and targeted programmes …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
12
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted in Part
The Department told us that illness, rather than unauthorised absence, was the biggest driver of the increase in absence, particularly persistent absence. It noted that this year’s figures were for the autumn term only, when there had been quite a lot of illness. A pupil would only need to have …
Read more
The Department told us that illness, rather than unauthorised absence, was the biggest driver of the increase in absence, particularly persistent absence. It noted that this year’s figures were for the autumn term only, when there had been quite a lot of illness. A pupil would only need to have missed seven days during the term to be classed as persistently absent, and quite a lot of people who got flu would have been off for seven days.23 The Department said that the data showed that attendance was lower on Fridays than on other days of the week, and a little lower on Mondays, but did not indicate why. It also noted that anecdotally this pattern had also existed before the pandemic.24
Show less
Government response AI summary
While the committee's item is a conclusion on the drivers and patterns of pupil absence, the government's response commits to developing a better understanding of absence rates among disadvantaged pupils by July 2024. It also states existing comprehensive measures and targeted programmes are already in …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
13
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted in Part
We asked the Department what its plans were to deal with pupil absences. It told us that attendance rates were improving as levels of illness reduced, but there was more to be done.25 The Department said that a lot of its work on attendance started from the principle of providing …
Read more
We asked the Department what its plans were to deal with pupil absences. It told us that attendance rates were improving as levels of illness reduced, but there was more to be done.25 The Department said that a lot of its work on attendance started from the principle of providing support, particularly for children who had other disadvantages such as vulnerable children or children with special educational needs and disabilities.26 It highlighted that attendance for children in care, which had previously been worse than for other children, was now better because of the support they were given by social workers and virtual school heads.27
Show less
Government response AI summary
While the committee's item is a conclusion on the Department's plans for pupil absences, the government's response commits to developing a better understanding of absence rates among disadvantaged pupils by July 2024. It also states existing comprehensive measures and targeted programmes are already in place …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted in Part
The Department said it had set a strong expectation that attendance was everyone’s responsibility, including parents, schools and local authorities. It also stressed the importance of leadership and data. It explained that national leadership was being provided by the Attendance Action Alliance which brought together key players from across the …
Read more
The Department said it had set a strong expectation that attendance was everyone’s responsibility, including parents, schools and local authorities. It also stressed the importance of leadership and data. It explained that national leadership was being provided by the Attendance Action Alliance which brought together key players from across the school system who could make a difference, and this approach was increasingly being 18 Qq 31–32 19 Q 49 20 C&AG’s Report, para 3.19 21 ERS0002 Action Tutoring, page 4 22 C&AG’s Report, para 3.19 23 Q 68 24 Qq 52–53 25 Q 49 26 Q 37 27 Q 36 10 Education recovery in schools in England replicated at local level. The Department said the Alliance enabled a better understanding of what worked through the whole system. The range of different approaches included work with individual parents, direct support such as phoning parents up in the morning, and mentoring activities.28
Show less
Government response AI summary
While the committee's item is a conclusion on existing attendance efforts, the government's response commits to developing a better understanding of absence rates among disadvantaged pupils by July 2024. It also states existing comprehensive measures and targeted programmes are already in place for reducing absence.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
15
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
The Department highlighted that it was now collecting better data, drawn directly from state-funded schools’ own management information systems, which it could look at in detail, in real time. Schools voluntarily signed up to provide data and about 80% were doing so. The Department told us how it was now …
Read more
The Department highlighted that it was now collecting better data, drawn directly from state-funded schools’ own management information systems, which it could look at in detail, in real time. Schools voluntarily signed up to provide data and about 80% were doing so. The Department told us how it was now providing benchmarking data back to schools to allow them to compare themselves against other similar schools.29 In addition, better data allowed the Department and other partners to see trends, issues and solutions in a way that had not been possible before.30 Support for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's observation on the importance of data, committing to build on existing absence analysis and use available data during 2023-24 to better understand absence rates among disadvantaged pupils.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
16
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Acknowledged
We have been regularly pressing the Department to improve its support for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) since we reported on this subject in May 2020.31 The Department finally published the results of its SEND review in a Green Paper in March 2022, setting out proposals for …
Read more
We have been regularly pressing the Department to improve its support for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) since we reported on this subject in May 2020.31 The Department finally published the results of its SEND review in a Green Paper in March 2022, setting out proposals for consultation.32 The Green Paper said that the Department would publish a national delivery plan later in 2022. In the event, the SEND and Alternative Provision Improvement Plan was not published until March 2023. The Department plans to establish a change programme which will work over the next two to three years with selected local authorities in nine regions, meaning that putting actions into effect nationally will extend to 2025 and beyond.33
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government commits £2.6 billion to the SEND and AP improvement plan and £2.9 billion in pupil premium funding, stating it is taking the plan forward, but does not address the committee's concerns about the delays in plan publication or the extended national implementation timeframe.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
17
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Acknowledged
We asked the Department why the process was taking so long and specifically why it was not expecting to have a full set of new national standards even by the end of 2025. The Department said that it had made a commitment to start with the national standards that touched …
Read more
We asked the Department why the process was taking so long and specifically why it was not expecting to have a full set of new national standards even by the end of 2025. The Department said that it had made a commitment to start with the national standards that touched on the things that it knew people wanted most, on autism and mental health for example. It wanted to go as quickly as it could in creating the national standards, but it knew that the standards would only work if it co-created them with others across the SEND system. The Department also said that, as well as making sure that the education, health and care process was streamlined, it planned to focus on some of the national standards that would allow parents, teachers and the public know what should ordinarily available, including in mainstream school settings.34 28 Qq 49–50 29 Q 51 30 Qq 49, 54 31 Committee of Public Accounts, Support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, First Report of Session 2019–21, HC 85, March 2022 32 HM Government, SEND Review: Right support, right place, right time, Government consultation on the SEND and alternative provision system in England, CP 624, March 2022 33 HM Government, Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) and Alternative Provision (AP) Improvement Plan, CP 800, March 2023 34 Qq 55–57 Education recovery in schools in England 11 2 Embedding education recovery Schools’ engagement with the National Tutoring Programme
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government outlines its commitment to investing in the SEND and AP improvement plan and pupil premium funding, confirming it is taking the plan forward, but does not address the committee's concerns regarding the slow timeline for developing new national standards.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
18
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
By the end of 2021/22, pupils had started 2.5 million courses under the National Tutoring Programme.35 However, take-up of the two centrally run National Tutoring Programme schemes was below the Department’s expectations: in 2021/22, the number of courses was 45% of the Department’s target for the tuition partners scheme and …
Read more
By the end of 2021/22, pupils had started 2.5 million courses under the National Tutoring Programme.35 However, take-up of the two centrally run National Tutoring Programme schemes was below the Department’s expectations: in 2021/22, the number of courses was 45% of the Department’s target for the tuition partners scheme and 65% for the academic mentors scheme.36 The Department said that this shortfall had been outweighed by take-up of school-led tutoring, which gave schools more control, was cheaper and had boosted take-up. As a result, the Department had exceeded its near two million overall target for the number of courses started in 2021/22.37 The Department also said that introducing school-led tutoring, along with encouraging tutoring organisations to expand their operations into areas with less tutoring availability, had led to an increase in take-up in those areas, particularly in the north of England.38
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's observation of the National Tutoring Programme's performance, committing to simplify the programme by providing direct funding to schools and increasing the subsidy rate for 2023-24 to 50% to improve deliverability and understanding barriers to participation.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
19
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
In 2021/22, 87% of schools in England participated in some form of tutoring under the National Tutoring Programme.39 When we asked the Department why 13% of schools had not taken part at all in the National Tutoring Programme, it told us that this had been the “biggest disappointment” of the …
Read more
In 2021/22, 87% of schools in England participated in some form of tutoring under the National Tutoring Programme.39 When we asked the Department why 13% of schools had not taken part at all in the National Tutoring Programme, it told us that this had been the “biggest disappointment” of the recovery programme.40
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government has simplified the National Tutoring Programme, provided funding directly to schools, and increased the subsidy rate for 2023-24 to 50% to reduce barriers to participation. It is also using administrative data and evaluation to understand why some schools do not engage.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
20
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
The Department said there were a range of different reasons for why schools chose to engage with tutoring; some would be about their view of the value of tutoring and some would be about the process of engaging people to do tutoring. It told us that it was seeking to …
Read more
The Department said there were a range of different reasons for why schools chose to engage with tutoring; some would be about their view of the value of tutoring and some would be about the process of engaging people to do tutoring. It told us that it was seeking to reduce the number of schools that had not engaged with the National Tutoring Programme and was putting a good deal of resource into persuading those schools of the benefits of tutoring, through contacting them directly and through identifying what had worked well.41
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government has simplified the National Tutoring Programme, provided funding directly to schools, and increased the subsidy rate for 2023-24 to 50% to reduce barriers to participation. It is also using administrative data and evaluation to understand why some schools do not engage.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
21
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
The Department told us of a number of ways it had been sharing best practice on the National Tutoring Programme. These included offering direct support to schools and having webinars and shared promotions and research. It highlighted in particular research by the Education Endowment Foundation and the National Foundation for …
Read more
The Department told us of a number of ways it had been sharing best practice on the National Tutoring Programme. These included offering direct support to schools and having webinars and shared promotions and research. It highlighted in particular research by the Education Endowment Foundation and the National Foundation for Educational Research that had embedded guidance in schools to support effective tutoring.42 The Department also noted that some 70% of school leaders were following Education Endowment Foundation evidence in using their recovery premium funding. It described that evidence as the “gold standard”.43 We asked the Department what lessons it had learned from the first two years that it would apply to the next two years. It told us that the most important was the power of data to target the pupils and places that 35 C&AG’s Report, Key facts 36 C&AG’s Report, para 12 37 Qq 48, 75, 76 38 Qq 47, 48 39 C&AG’s Report, para 2.27 40 Q 92 41 Q 92 42 Q 45 43 Q 83 12 Education recovery in schools in England need it most. The Department added that there was continuing evaluation of the National Tutoring Programme to ensure tutoring was delivering the best value for money, and that it had committed to investigate how it could further develop longitudinal studies.44 Withdrawal of the Department’s subsidy for tutoring
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees to apply lessons learned from the National Tutoring Programme by August 2024, detailing plans to simplify the program, provide direct funding to schools, use data to understand barriers, and increase the subsidy rate for 2023-24.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
22
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
The Department provided funding of £594 million for the National Tutoring Programme taking 2020/21 and 2021/22 together, and plans to provide a further £527 million in the following two years.45 It is progressively reducing the rate of subsidy it provides for tutoring, from 75% in 2020/21 to 25% in 2023/24, …
Read more
The Department provided funding of £594 million for the National Tutoring Programme taking 2020/21 and 2021/22 together, and plans to provide a further £527 million in the following two years.45 It is progressively reducing the rate of subsidy it provides for tutoring, from 75% in 2020/21 to 25% in 2023/24, so schools are having to cover a growing proportion of the costs from other sources, such as pupil premium funding. After 2023/24, schools will have to cover the full cost of tutoring themselves.46
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's observation regarding funding and subsidy reduction, committing to monitor tutoring volumes and ensure tutoring is embedded across schools in England from 2024 as a staple offer, with further details to follow.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
23
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
Written evidence we received from The Tutor Trust noted that some schools, particularly smaller primary schools, were struggling to fund the cost of tutoring in 2022/23, when the Department was providing a subsidy of 60%.47 We also heard from Action Tutoring that, with the drop in the subsidy to 25% …
Read more
Written evidence we received from The Tutor Trust noted that some schools, particularly smaller primary schools, were struggling to fund the cost of tutoring in 2022/23, when the Department was providing a subsidy of 60%.47 We also heard from Action Tutoring that, with the drop in the subsidy to 25% in 2023/24, more schools would struggle and essential interventions such as tutoring might be relegated.48
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's conclusion about schools struggling to fund tutoring due to subsidy reductions, and has responded by increasing the 2023-24 subsidy rate from 25% to 50% to make the programme more deliverable for schools, alongside ongoing monitoring of tutoring volumes.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
24
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
We asked the Department how, as the level of subsidy reduced, schools would be able to meet the cost of continuing to participate in the National Tutoring Programme. The Department told us that it had always been clear that the subsidy would taper and, if tutoring was to become a …
Read more
We asked the Department how, as the level of subsidy reduced, schools would be able to meet the cost of continuing to participate in the National Tutoring Programme. The Department told us that it had always been clear that the subsidy would taper and, if tutoring was to become a normal and embedded part of the school system as the Department intended, it would have to be funded increasingly through mainstream school budgets. It assured us that it wanted schools to be sufficiently funded to do all the things they needed to do for their pupils, and that overall school funding in the current year was going up by something in the order of £4 billion.49
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government has set the National Tutoring Programme subsidy rate for 2023-24 at 50% to make it more deliverable for schools, allowing them to meet costs with less of their own money. It also continues to monitor tutoring volumes and is developing further interventions.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
25
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
The Department acknowledged, however, that the fall in the level of subsidy was significant and told us it had accepted the NAO’s recommendation that it should model the impact of moving from 60% to 25% in a single year.50 It also undertook to keep monitoring this area and, if there …
Read more
The Department acknowledged, however, that the fall in the level of subsidy was significant and told us it had accepted the NAO’s recommendation that it should model the impact of moving from 60% to 25% in a single year.50 It also undertook to keep monitoring this area and, if there was a significant drop-off in tutoring, to look again at the whole issue of funding to see what more needed to be done.51
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's conclusion that monitoring tutoring levels and intervening if necessary is important. It confirms ongoing monitoring and is developing interventions, having already increased the 2023-24 tutoring subsidy rate from 25% to 50% to make the program more deliverable.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
26
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Accepted
We asked the Department how it would create a sustainable tuition market, given the different skills needed for tutoring and classroom teaching. It told us that quality was key and that, important though finding additional tutors was, effective practice and use of evidence for how effective tutoring is delivered were …
Read more
We asked the Department how it would create a sustainable tuition market, given the different skills needed for tutoring and classroom teaching. It told us that quality was key and that, important though finding additional tutors was, effective practice and use of evidence for how effective tutoring is delivered were essential. The Department emphasised the National Tutoring Programme’s focus on training. Over 20,000 people had been through that training, which it said had resulted in a long-term legacy of more people in schools skilled to deliver one-to-one and small group tutoring.52 44 Qq 104, 112, 113 45 C&AG’s Report, Figure 4 46 C&AG’s Report, para 1.17 47 ERS0007 The Tutor Trust, page 9 48 ERS0002 Action Tutoring page 7 49 Qq 93, 95 50 Q 95 51 Q 96 52 Q 110 Education recovery in schools in England 13 Tracking progress towards the ambitions in the Schools White Paper
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's conclusion regarding a sustainable tuition market, committing to embed tutoring across all schools in England from 2024 and expecting it to continue as a staple offer, with further information to be provided in due course.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
27
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
In 2021, we recommended that the Department should set out clear metrics that it would use to monitor the catch-up programme, and indicate what level of performance would represent success, and the Department agreed with this recommendation.53 However, although the Department recognises that it needs to demonstrate what has been …
Read more
In 2021, we recommended that the Department should set out clear metrics that it would use to monitor the catch-up programme, and indicate what level of performance would represent success, and the Department agreed with this recommendation.53 However, although the Department recognises that it needs to demonstrate what has been achieved for its spending on education recovery, it has not set targets for the impact it wants to achieve from the recovery interventions because it now regards these as part of its overall activity to improve pupils’ attainment.54
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation to set clear metrics and targets for the impact of education recovery interventions. It states it already publishes national attainment data, key performance indicators, and outlines ambitions in the Schools White Paper to measure progress across the school system.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
28
Recommendation
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
In the March 2022 Schools White Paper, the Department set ambitions that, by 2030, 90% of primary school children would achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, and the percentage of children meeting the expected standard in the worst performing areas would have increased by a third. The …
Read more
In the March 2022 Schools White Paper, the Department set ambitions that, by 2030, 90% of primary school children would achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, and the percentage of children meeting the expected standard in the worst performing areas would have increased by a third. The ambitions for secondary schools were for the national GCSE average grade in both English language and maths to increase from 4.5 in 2019 to 5.0 by 2030.55 The Department has not set milestones between now and 2030 to show progress towards these ambitions.56 We asked the Department how, without milestones, it was going to track progress. The Department agreed that the long- term ambition in the Schools White Paper invited a recognition of the importance of setting progress measures. It had not done that in the White Paper, but expected to be able to make public its plans for primary school pupils in the next couple of months.57
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government disagrees with the recommendation to set explicit milestones for its 2030 ambitions, arguing that existing national attainment data, KPIs, and forthcoming statistics already provide sufficient measures of progress.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
29
Conclusion
Fifty-Fifth Report - Education recovery…
Rejected
The Department pointed us to the performance metrics that it published every year in its Outcome Delivery Plan. It said that it published a wide range of metrics at Key Stages 2 and 4, and the results of Key Stage 1 tests such as the phonics screening check. The Department …
Read more
The Department pointed us to the performance metrics that it published every year in its Outcome Delivery Plan. It said that it published a wide range of metrics at Key Stages 2 and 4, and the results of Key Stage 1 tests such as the phonics screening check. The Department assured us that it used all of these measures to hold itself to account, and that it expected other people to use them to hold it to account for progress.58 We note, however, that the Department’s most recent Outcome Delivery Plan was published in July 2021, nearly two years ago.59 53 Committee of Public Accounts, COVID-19: Support for children’s education, Third Report of Session 2021–22, HC 240, 26 May 2021; HM Treasury, Treasury Minutes – Government responses to the Committee of Public Accounts on the First to the Sixth reports from Session 2021–22, August 2021 (page 11) 54 C&AG’s Report, para 3.3 55 HM Government, Opportunity for all: strong schools with great teachers for your child, March 2022, page 11 56 C&AG’s Report, para 3.4 57 Q 101 58 Q 102 59 Department for Education, DfE Outcome Delivery Plan: 2021 to 2022, published 15 July 2021 14 Education recovery in schools in England
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the implicit recommendation concerning its performance metrics, stating it already publishes national attainment data for various key stages and critical programmes. It indicates these, along with ambitions in the Schools White Paper, collectively provide measures for progress.
Read full response →
HM Treasury