Pupil Premium and Recovery Grant Funding

Part A (i): Pupil Premium Strategy Plan

Statement of Intent

Our intention is that all pupils, irrespective of their background or the challenges they face, make +1 progress and achieve high attainment across the curriculum.

The focus of our pupil premium strategy is to support disadvantaged pupils to achieve that goal, including progress for those who are already high attainers. We will consider the challenges faced by vulnerable pupils, such as those who have a social worker and young carers. The activity we have outlined in this statement is also intended to support their needs, regardless of whether they are disadvantaged or not.

High-quality teaching is at the heart of our approach, with a focus on areas in which disadvantaged pupils require the most support. This is proven to have the greatest impact on closing the disadvantage attainment gap and at the same time will benefit the non-disadvantaged pupils in our school. Implicit in the intended outcomes detailed below, is the intention that non-disadvantaged pupils’ attainment will be sustained and improved alongside progress for their disadvantaged peers.

Our strategy is also integral to wider school plans for education recovery, notably in its targeted support through the National Tutoring Programme for pupils whose education has been worst affected, including non-disadvantaged pupils. Our approach will be responsive to common challenges and individual needs, rooted in robust diagnostic assessment, not assumptions about the impact of disadvantage. The approaches we have adopted complement each other to help pupils excel. To ensure they are effective we will:

ensure disadvantaged pupils are challenged in the work that they’re set
act early to intervene at the point need is identified
adopt a whole school approach in which all staff take responsibility for disadvantaged pupils’ outcomes and raise expectations of what they can achieve

Challenges

The table below outlines the key challenges to achievement that we have identified among our disadvantaged pupils.

Challenge Number	Details of the Challenge
1	General academic disadvantage, upon entry into the school. As a school we use GL Assessment to understand about the prior attainment as students start at the school. Evidence from these assessments show that students eligible for the pupil premium are already academically disadvantaged. Last year, upon entry into the school, disadvantaged students were found to be 11 SAS points (standardised age scores, a nationally benchmarked age-related measure) below their more affluent peers in maths, and 9 SAS points behind in English.
2	Poorer reading and spelling, upon entry into the school. Nationally standardised reading and spelling tests are taken every year as part of our ongoing monitoring of student outcomes. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds tend to enter the school with lower reading ages and spelling competency than their more affluent peers. Typically upon entry, disadvantaged students are 8 months behind their more affluent peers in spelling and score 5 SAS (standardised age score) behind in reading ability.
3	Poorer organisational skills. From our experience and observation, students from more disadvantaged backgrounds tend to face specific organisational challenges at the school. This includes accessing and completing homework, punctuality to school, bringing in the correct equipment and wearing the correct uniform. Consequently, we see an overrepresentation (40% rather than an expected 20%) of sanctions for poor organisation.
4	More complex pastoral issues that impact on academic performance. From our experience and observation, students from more disadvantaged backgrounds tend to face a greater range of pastoral challenges. This includes mental health issues, challenging familial and peer relationships, poor behaviour, safeguarding concerns and other problems often associated with low economic circumstances. The number of concerns regarding disadvantaged students last year was almost 7 times greater than for more affluent peers.
5	Poor attendance. From our experience and observation, students from more disadvantaged backgrounds tend to be absent from school more frequently. Last year, the attendance rate for disadvantaged students was 92%, compared to 95% for more affluent peers.

Intended Outcomes

This explains the outcomes we are aiming for by the end of our current strategy plan, and how we will measure whether they have been achieved.

Intended Outcome	Success Criteria
Improve general academic outcomes relative to peers.	At the time of our first published public examinations (academic year 2023/24) disadvantaged students achieve significantly above a P8 of 0. In the intervening years, there is evidence of closing the attainment gap between disadvantaged and more affluent peers.
Improve reading and spelling	Reading comprehension tests and spelling tests demonstrate improved comprehension skills among disadvantaged pupils and a smaller disparity between the scores of disadvantaged pupils and their non-disadvantaged peers. Teachers should also have recognised this improvement through engagement in lessons and book scrutiny.
Improve organisational skills	From Year 9 onwards, there is a significant reduction in the number of sanctions awarded for organisation.
Reduce the impact of pastoral issues	Year -on-year decreases in the number of referrals made to external agencies, and flagging of concerns by staff. Pastoral services provide proactive support.
Improve attendance	Sustained high attendance from 2024/25 demonstrated by the overall absence rate for all pupils being no more than 5%, and the attendance gap between disadvantaged pupils and their non-disadvantaged peers being reduced to no more than 2%.

Activity in this academic year

This details how we intend to spend our pupil premium (and recovery premium funding) in the 22/23 academic year to address the challenges listed above.

Predicted Income:

22/23 PP Grant £155,383

21/22 PP underspend/carry forward £23,600

Total £178,983

Teaching (for example, CPD, recruitment and retention)

Budget cost for the below: £31,974

Activity

Evidence that supports this approach

Challenge number(s) addressed

Cost

Purchase of standardised diagnostic assessments (GL and associated products). Training will be provided for staff to ensure assessments are interpreted correctly.

Standardised tests can provide reliable insights into the specific strengths and weaknesses of each pupil to help ensure they receive the correct additional support through interventions or teacher instruction. Click here for more details.

1, 2

£1,800

30% of £6,000

£900

30% x 20 Exams Officer days Admin Assistant £3,000

The employment of additional maths and english teaching hours, that is then deployed for those who are significantly behind their peers within normal curriculum time.

Having previously used external tutors for vulnerable pupils, the school decided to recruit an additional maths and english ECT teacher to enable pupils in all 4 year groups to recieve 50 minutes of small tuition each day. For 22/23, this amounts to 20 intervention groups a week for each subject, 1 ECT teacher's timetable.

This allows for very small class sizes for those students (disproportionately PP) who are most at need of specialist and tailored maths support. The very small class sizes (approx 4 or 5) allows the teacher to deliver maths in a different way. This approach is recommended by the EEF.

£29,174

39.4% of 2 ECT salaries: (£74,564) to enable maths and english intervention groups to run.

Pastoral and Behavioural Support

Budgeted cost: £149,976

Activity	Evidence that supports this approach	Challenge number(s) addressed	Cost
Additional employment of a PSL to support students academic and pastoral progress and wellbeing.	Click here for supporting evidence.	3, 4, 5	£29,605
OnCall and a centralised behaviour system.	Click here for supporting evidence.	3, 4, 5	£32,666 50% of FT teacher. OnCall staffed SLT and PSLs. Average £65,332
LSA support for PP students not in receipt of Top Up Funding	Click here for supporting evidence.	1, 3	£30,000
45% of Attendance Officer (45% of pupils with below 92% attendance are PP)	Click here for supporting evidence.	4, 5	£13,464 45% of £29,921
Uniform & travel support including £50 support on new uniform for all Y7 FSM	Meeting basic needs of students.	4	£5,656
50% contribution towards music tuition for PP	Example of evidence here.	1, 2, 3	£12,189
Professional Educational Services for PP pupils (counselling etc.	Meeting basic needs of students.	4	£7,500
Contribution towards PP trips	Example of evidence here.	1	£3,938
50% of DHT & PP lead’s time	Required for the leadership of the above.	All	£14,958

Total budgeted cost: £181,850

Part A (ii): Recovery Grant Expenditure

Predicted Income for 22/23 £36,156.

The Recovery Grant is being used to part fund targeted maths and English support groups aimed at closing the progress gap for the most disadvantaged pupils. Students selected are based on assessment data, teacher observations and background knowledge about the pupil.

Of the students in the alternative curriculum in 21/22:

50% were entitled to FSM
18% had EAL
91% had SEND
50% were tier 1
45% were tier 2
5% were tier 3

23 students received 50 minutes of small group instruction a day in groups of up to 8 with 1 - 3 members of staff for each group.

Activity	Evidence that supports this approach	Challenge number(s) addressed	Cost
Having previously used external tutors for vulnerable pupils, the school decided to recruit an additional maths and english ECT teacher to enable pupils in all 4 year groups to receive 50 minutes of small tuition each day. For 22/23, this amounts to 20 intervention groups a week for each subject, 1 ECT teacher's timetable.	Click here for supporting evidence.	1, 2	The cost of this is £74,564 (2x gross cost of M1, £37,282) This cost will be met as follows: £9,234 School Led Tutoring (12.23%) £36,156 Recovery Premium (48.49%) £29,174 Pupil Premium (39.4%)

Part B: Review of Outcomes in the Previous Academic Year

Improve general academic outcomes relative to peers. Given that we are yet to have any public exams, our current evidence is drawn primarily from internal assessments (sat at the end of each term) and nationally benchmarked English, maths and science tests (sat yearly). The table below shows how students from PP and non-PP backgrounds have fared across all subjects in our internal summer assessments. It suggests that PP students are broadly performing in line with their more affluent peers.

The nationally benchmarked test results, summarised below, also suggest that PP students are making more progress than the average student, nationally. The results also suggest that PP students are, on average, outperforming the national cohort.

Improve reading and spelling. We measure this through nationally benchmarked reading and spelling tests, carried out annually. The table below shows a summary of these tests across all years. Results suggest that PP students are making more progress than the average student, nationally. The results also suggest that PP students are, on average, outperforming the national cohort.

The school is yet to experience a year without Covid-19. This makes any analysis of attendance figures – where full and partial closures have occurred and where students are advised to remain home in certain circumstances – problematic. It also makes it difficult to judge the impact of our pastoral support as we continue to see an increase in pandemic-related anxiety and mental health generally.

Reviewing the impact of the recovery grant expenditure. Analysis of maths small group tuition, funded in part by the recovery grant, suggests significant improvements in maths beyond the average progress seen across each year group. This analysis was conducted using GL assessed standard age scores (SAS). Details can be found below.

We therefore conclude that this form of intervention is effective and will not only be continued next year but expanded to include English.