More than a thousand small rural schools face the prospect of cuts under the government’s proposals for a national funding formula, despite ministerial assurances that they would be protected, TES can reveal.

Critics are warning that the changes could threaten the viability of many of the schools.

A TES analysis of government figures illustrating the impact of the plans shows that at least 1,101 rural schools that meet the Department for Education’s official definition of “small” would have their budgets cut.

The news follows education secretary Justine Greening’s assurance to Parliament in December that the new funding arrangements would “protect small rural schools, which are so important for their local communities through the inclusion of a sparsity factor”.

England’s small schools in rural areas would gain an average 1.3 per cent under the proposals. However the published figures - which compare individual schools’ 2016-17 funding with what they could expect under the new national funding formula - also reveal that more than 40 per cent of the small rural schools listed by the DfE would end up with less money.

Potentially ‘disastrous’

Nancy Lees is head of Castleton CofE Primary in Derbyshire, which could be hit by a 0.5 per cent cut in the first year of the new system, and a 1 per cent cut in the second if there is no transitional funding.

“For us, it’s really quite disastrous, because we are very, very small,” she said. “We have got 18 children on the roll. If we can’t recoup money from somewhere, we will have to question the future viability of the school.”

All but one of the small rural schools from the DfE list affected are primaries with fewer than 161 pupils. A small rural secondary - James Calvert Spence College in Northumberland, with 365 pupils - will also lose money, the figures show.

The budget cuts in the first year of the new funding system - with transitional funding - would be up to 1.2 per cent. In a subsequent year, if no transitional funding were available, this would rise to up to 2.5 per cent.

‘The government said it would protect small rural schools, but it clearly hasn’t’

The number of small rural schools missing out could be even higher because the DfE list of designated rural schools does not include any academies.

“The government said it would protect small rural schools, but it clearly hasn’t,” said John Howson, a visiting professor at Oxford Brookes University. “On the whole, rural schools benefit, but there are a significant minority that lose.

“The risk is that, if a school can’t operate without a deficit budget, then it needs to come up with more money or it closes.”

Kevin Courtney, general secretary of the NUT teaching union, said: “Unless this changes, the government may call into question the financial viability of rural schools,”

The proposals for a national funding formula are designed to make school funding fairer across the country, by ironing out local variations, and are supposed to take account of “sparsity” - a measure of the number of pupils and distance to the next school.

‘Outlook is poor’

But Ivan Ould, chair of the f40 group, which campaigns for fairer school funding, said: “If the sparsity factor is not adequate, there will be a movement to the closure of small isolated schools with social consequences for communities and financial consequences for the transportation of pupils,”

Barbara Taylor, secretary of the National Association of Small Schools and chair of governors at a small rural school that is due to lose funding, said the proposals were “very disappointing”.

“It is a difficult situation and it’s going to make it very hard for small schools,” she said. “In some cases, if they can’t balance their budgets then the outlook is poor.”

Jane Naumkin is a parent who led a successful campaign against the planned closure of Pott Shrigley Church school, in Cheshire East, last year. Under the funding proposals, the primary - which is based in a rural hamlet and has about 23 pupils - would lose £4,000.

“The government is certainly not doing enough on funding,” she said. “It really damages a local community beyond repair if a school vanishes. That became clear during our campaign.”

Russell Hobby, general secretary of the NAHT headteachers’ union, said that small rural schools would find it hard to cope with the loss of funding. “These heads will be surprised and disappointed, and the opportunities to make savings are very limited in some cases,” he added. “The headteachers do not see how they can make the savings required of them.”

A DfE spokesperson said “Small rural schools will gain on average 1.3 per cent. Small and remote primary schools will see even larger gains of 5.3 per cent on average.”

@tes