Why use ICFP?

The ICFP process is about providing useful management information to school leaders and governors/trustees. It is not, much to some leaders’ surprise, about levelling all schools so they are the same. It actually recognises, and acknowledges, the aspects that make schools different and even exceptional.

The ICFP process may flag certain areas of your school’s spending as red, but red does not suggest that this spend is wrong. It is simply flagging that the school is deploying its financial resources differently to other schools. It also allows the school to quantify what that out of kilter spend is costing the school. This then allows school leaders and governors/trustees to assess whether the impact achieved from that spend is worth the additional spend or if these financial resources could be deployed with greater impact elsewhere.

It may be useful to consider some real-life examples:

A two form of entry primary school in the south-east identified that their spend on curriculum support staff – primarily LSAs and TAs – was much higher than similar schools. Initially this did not concern the school’s leaders and governors as they felt that providing a teaching assistant in each class was important to ensuring the pupils received a quality education and the school was able to balance its budget. This additional spend was 8% of their total revenue income which equated to just under £180,000. When the school compared their outcomes to other schools they began to question whether this was the best use of this annual funding as their outcomes were broadly average. Over the next two years the school used the natural wastage within their curriculum support staff to reduce the spend by 5% of total revenue income and invested the resulting saving of over £110,000 in a one to one IT device solution for their pupils. Results are now significantly higher than other similar schools and they have achieved an Outstanding grading at their recent Ofsted inspection.

An 11-19 secondary school in central London were balancing their budget and were initially not concerned that their teacher contact ratio at 0.67 was well below the benchmarked range as they felt that allowing teaching staff additional preparation time allowed their teachers to plan better quality lessons for pupils. The school had a Good Ofsted grading and results which fluctuated within the broadly average Progress 8 range. The ICFP analysis identified that the low teacher contact ratio was costing the school between £480,000 and £640,000. The leaders and trustees realised that they would be able to re-open the school library and resource centre, which had been closed due to financial reasons, and increase the pastoral and behaviour support which would assist with the increasing behaviour issues which the school leaders were concerned would lead to a downgraded outcome at their imminent Ofsted inspection. The school undertook a planned approach to recruitment where each post, as staff resigned, was reviewed and the school moved over two years to a teacher contact ratio of 0.74 leading to an annual saving of a little over £300,000 which was invested in a well reduced and staffed library and resource centre and a well-staffed pastoral and behaviour unit which led revised approaches to behaviour. The school has recently retained its Good Ofsted grading and results have improved, particularly amongst sixth form pupils.

An all through special school in the South West was facing a significant cumulative deficit over the next three years and had been told by their Local Authority that they needed to remove their provision of music and art therapy to balance their budget as this provision was not strictly educational. The school, however, felt that this provision was essential to maintaining the well being of their pupils and ensuring they were ready to learn. The ICFP analysis indicated that their senior leadership spend was considerably higher than other special schools in the South West. The school took the decision to reduce their leadership team from 9 leaders to five leaders which saved the school a little over £350,000 annually and brought them to within the benchmarked range. The school achieved this within a wider re-structure which increased some of the middle leadership responsibilities to ensure that the leadership capacity was retained. When this was factored into the saving the total annual saving was around £280,000 which allowed the school to retain, and actually extend, their therapies for pupils whilst balancing their budget.

A good quality ICFP analysis responds to the specific context of your school and allows the school to recognise, assess and support the approaches that are really important to their success.