Pupil Premium
Accountability
The government believes that head teachers and school leaders should decide how to use the pupil premium money within their own schools and are then held accountable for the decisions they make through:
- the performance tables which show the performance of disadvantaged pupils compared with their peers
- the Ofsted inspection framework, under which inspectors focus on the attainment of pupil groups, and in particular those who attract the pupil premium
- the reports for parents that schools have to publish online
Please see below how Bedale C of E Primary school has used pupil premium money and the impact it had on these children.
NB: Some figures may not tally with the ‘Financial Year’ table due to pupil mobility during the year. Also, please note that the data shown for Key Stage 1 pupils does not use the same starting point as the nationally recognised APS scale. Therefore, please contact the school if you require further clarification.
Pupil premium money is funding which targets funds to the benefit of pupils from low income families (those children who are eligible for free school meals). For this year pupils who have been eligible for free school meals at any point in the last 6 years are also included in the allocation (Ever-6 measure).
Pupils who are look after (in care/fostered) for more than 6 months and children from service families are also included.
In the 2019-20 financial year, Bedale Primary School received Pupil Premium Funding of £78,333.00 as follows:
| Per Child (20/21) | 2019/20 (April Financial Year) | 2020/21 (April Financial Year) | |
| Free School Meals |
£1,345 |
£59,400 |
£63,835 |
|
Looked After |
£2,345 |
£8,133 |
£4,690 |
|
Service Child |
£310 |
£10,800 | £9,920 |
Barriers and issues addressed in school using Pupil Premium funding (2018-19)
In order to allocate money in the most suitable way, the school looked at the specific needs of the children receiving PP and set objectives to match - these are addressed in our pupil premium spending evaluations.
|
|
|
- Attendance of a small group of FSM pupils in Key Stage 2 is less than 90%. Their attendance has had a detrimental effect on their academic progress. Therefore, the attendance is being closely monitored by the PP champion and is now included in the SIP. Five of the nine FSM children in Year 6 have an attendance lower than 96%. Two having an attendance lower than 90%. This year group have had a specific monitoring and reward structure put in place. |
|
- The school have identified individuals with specific needs who require support so they can access the curriculum. Members of staff have been allocated a specific PP child to support. |
|
- Some pupils who are new to school in Year 1 and Year 2 have had specific gaps in their learning identified by school.
|
|
|
Pupil Premium Spending Evaluation Summer 2019
As the result of our effective use of Pupil Premium money, we have been able to support our pupils to achieve well in EYFS, Y1 phonics screening and KS1 and KS2 assessments.
You can see more about our assessment results over recent years below:
Summer 2018 Outcome Summary
|
EYFS |
Our School FSM children |
National average 2017 |
|
Good level of development |
67% |
71% |
|
Our School FSM children |
National average 2017 |
|
|
Y1 phonics screening |
67% |
81% |
|
KS1 SATS |
Our School FSM children achieving expected standard |
Expected standard - National average 2017 |
|
Reading |
80% |
76% |
|
Writing |
80% |
68% |
|
Maths |
80% |
75% |
|
Combined |
80% |
64% |
|
Science |
80% |
83% |
|
KS2 SATS |
Our School FSM children achieving expected standard |
Expected standard - National average 2018 |
|
Reading |
67% |
75% |
|
GPS |
78% |
78% |
|
Writing |
78% |
78% |
|
Maths |
67% |
76% |
|
Combined |
56% |
61% |
|
Science |
89% |
|
More able pupils - Y2 SATS |
FSM pupils working at greater depth |
National 2017 |
|
Reading |
20% |
25% |
|
Writing |
20% |
16% |
|
Maths |
40% |
21% |
|
Combined |
20% |
11% |
|
More able pupils - Y6 SATS |
FSM pupils working at greater depth |
National 2017 |
|
Reading |
33% |
25% |
|
GPS |
33% |
31% |
|
Writing |
44% |
18% |
|
Maths |
22% |
23% |
|
Combined |
22% |
9% |
Note: Where national data not yet available for 2018 results, 2017 data has been shown.
Summer 2017 Outcome Summary
| EYFS | Our School FSM children | National average |
| Good level of development | 80% | 71% |
| Our School FSM children | National average | |
| Y1 phonics screening | 100% |
81% |
| KS1 SATS | Our School FSM children achieving expected standard | Expected standard - National average |
| Reading | 100% | 76% |
| Writing | 100% | 68% |
| Maths | 100% | 75% |
| Combined | 100% | 64% |
| Science | 100% | 83% |
| KS2 SATS | Our School FSM children achieving expected standard | Expected standard - National average |
| Reading | 88% | 71% |
| GPS | 75% | 77% |
| Writing | 88% | 76% |
| Maths | 75% | 75% |
| Combined | 75% | 61% |
| Science | 88% | 82% |
| More able pupils - Y2 SATS | FSM pupils working at greater depth | National |
| Reading | 13% | 25% |
| Writing | 25% | 21% |
| Maths | 25% | 16% |
| Combined | 13% | 11% |
| More able pupils - Y6 SATS | FSM pupils working at greater depth | National |
| Reading | 25% | 25% |
| GPS | 13% | 31% |
| Writing | 25% | 18% |
| Maths | 0% | 23% |
| Combined | 0% | 9% |
Barriers and issues to be addressed in school using Pupil Premium funding (2016-17)
In order to allocate money in the most suitable way, the school looked at the specific needs of the children receiving PP and set objectives to match - these are addressed in our pupil premium spending evaluations.
|
Oral language skills of CLA pupils are lower than other pupils on entry (Years 1, 2 and 4). This slows progress in subsequent years. |
|
Behaviour issues for small group of FSM pupils in Year 6 (writing and maths) this has had a detrimental effect on their academic progress. |
|
Above average mobility within year group, a number of FSM pupils in Year 5 new to Bedale primary – this has had a detrimental effect on their academic progress (maths). Attendance of one FSM pupil in Year 5 (reading and writing) significantly below average, attendance 80.5%. |
|
Attendance of a small group of FSM pupils in Year 4 (reading, writing and maths) this has had a detrimental effect on their academic progress. Attendance of two pupils 88.2% and 91.6%, both below the school average. |
|
Attendance of one FSM pupil in Year 3 (writing and maths) significantly below average, attendance 86.6%. Behaviour issues for one pupil on FSM in Year 3 (writing and maths) this has had detrimental effect on their academic progress. |
|
Average FSM pupil in Year 2 making less progress than others across KS1 (reading and writing). |
