����Vlog

Deficits in financially struggling trusts are almost 75 per cent bigger in those serving higher numbers of pupils from low-income families and with special educational needs, ����Vlog analysis finds.

The £320 per-pupil gap highlights the need for funding and accountability systems to recognise the challenges of providing targeted support, say experts.

�ձ��’ analysis looked at the 261 academy trusts that recorded financial deficits over the three years to 2024-25, with the aim of focusing on those facing consistent financial pressures rather than one-off shocks.

Trusts with above-average levels of pupils on free school meals (FSM) and pupils with special educational needs and disabilities had a median deficit of £756 per pupil over three years, compared with £436 among the trusts where both factors were below average.

The findings suggest that, even among trusts that are persistently struggling financially, those serving intakes with higher levels of disadvantage and SEND are under significantly more financial strain.

SEND financial pressures

Financial accounts from a sample of 159 multi-academy trusts and 102 single-academy trusts that recorded deficits in each of the past three years repeatedly cited SEND pressures as contributing to deficits or wider budget pressures.

St Thomas Aquinas Catholic Multi-Academy Trust, which has above-average levels of students on SEN support, said in its 2024-25 accounts that inadequate SEND funding had created a shortfall of more than £1 million.

Other trust accounts cited pupils with complex needs being supported while schools waited for education, health and care plan (EHCP) funding, SEND costs exceeding income, and deficits linked to high-needs cohorts in individual schools.

In trusts consistently operating at a deficit, those with higher-than-average numbers of pupils receiving SEN support had a median cumulative deficit of £737 per pupil over three years.

This compares with £449 for those with lower-than-average SEN support: a £288 gap.

Along with rising SEND costs, common financial pressures highlighted in accounts included falling pupil numbers, staffing costs, energy bills, estate pressures and delays in high-needs funding.

Some trusts also pointed to staff restructures and redundancies, shared leadership models, centralised services and income pooling to reduce costs.

Disadvantage pressures

Several trusts in multi-year deficits explicitly state in their accounts that they operate in areas of high deprivation or serve significant numbers of FSM-eligible pupils.

Some reported pupil premium eligibility rates exceeding 50 per cent in individual academies.

The Woodland Academy Trust cited its high proportion of FSM (44.5 per cent) and pupils with SEND (25.3 per cent) as “important context” for its operational deficit.

Nav Sanghara, chief executive of the trust, said schools are increasingly providing support that extends beyond education, and this is placing “significant pressure on already-stretched budgets”.

Trusts serving communities with additional needs are responding to increasingly complex pupil circumstances without funding keeping pace, she said.

“We need a funding system that more accurately reflects context, levels of need, greater investment in early intervention and sustainable reform of SEND funding,” Ms Sanghara added.

Similarly, other trust accounts referred to “invisible disadvantage”, socioeconomic disparities or the need for targeted strategies to support disadvantaged pupils.

St Thomas Aquinas Catholic Multi-Academy Trust, where around 15 per cent of pupils are on FSM - below the national average of 25.7 per cent - said inadequate funding for free school meals was one of the main reasons for its in-year deficit, with an estimated shortfall of more than £100,000.

Among trusts with multi-year deficits, those with above-average FSM eligibility had a median cumulative deficit of £651 per pupil over three years, compared with £546 per pupil for those below average.

Charlotte O’Regan, of the Sutton Trust social mobility charity, said the figures show the government must “reverse the real-terms erosion” of pupil premium funding and “rebalance the national funding formula” to achieve its ambition to halve the disadvantage gap.

Falling rolls risk

Jon Andrews, head of analysis at the Education Policy Institute, said falling pupil numbers would be “one of the biggest challenges” facing the system over the next few years. The impact will not be felt evenly across schools and trusts, the think tank advised.

Trusts with schools serving high levels of disadvantage or pupils with SEND could be particularly vulnerable because these pupils typically attract more funding, meaning a fall in numbers can mean a larger cash loss, he said.

The current accountability system also works against schools with higher numbers of vulnerable pupils, making them less attractive to parents at a time of falling rolls, Mr Andrews added.

“If the government is to meet its ambition of all schools being part of a strong and resilient trust-based system, it is important that both funding and accountability measures recognise the additional challenges faced by schools and trusts serving more disadvantaged communities,” he said.

Small trusts face higher burden

Around one-third of the trusts in repeated deficits over the past three years had fewer than 1,000 pupils.

Trusts with fewer than 500 pupils had an average cumulative deficit of £1,111 per pupil over three years, compared with £586 among trusts with 1,000 to 1,999 pupils.

This figure fell to £438 for trusts with 2,000 to 4,999 pupils, £280 for trusts with 5,000 to 9,999 pupils and £147 for trusts with 10,000 or more pupils.

Stephen Morales, chief executive of the Centre for Education Operational Excellence, said it was “inevitable” that smaller trusts and SATs were finding resilience “increasingly difficult” amid sustained cost pressures.

Smaller organisations typically have “less flexibility, less central capacity and fewer economies of scale” to absorb financial shocks linked to staffing costs, falling rolls, energy inflation, deprivation pressures and increasing SEND expenditure, he said.

While high-needs funding pressures may not explain every sustained deficit, he said, they are “undoubtedly contributing to a much more fragile financial environment” for many schools and trusts.

Combination of factors

Kevin Connor, partner at accountancy firm Bishop Fleming, said variations in financial outcomes were likely to be driven by a combination of pupil numbers, funding levels failing to keep pace with inflation, unfunded pay rises, estate pressures and SEND provision.

Although it is difficult to identify “a single overriding aspect”, Mr Connor warned that this combination of factors, alongside “relative short-term funding awards by government”, was creating an unstable environment for many trusts.

While larger MATs accounted for some of the largest cash deficits, smaller trusts were more exposed when deficits were measured per pupil, �ձ��’ analysis found.

Larger trusts generally had more flexibility to share services across their organisations, which could help operationally and produce savings, Mr Connor said.

But he added that continued deficits in smaller trusts were probably the result of many having “fully explored cost-saving measures” and already cut back as much as possible, leaving them with “little further room to manoeuvre”.

‘Not sustainable’

Julia Harnden, deputy director of policy at the Association of School and College Leaders, said the figures show that in-year deficits are “not anomalous” and are not confined to a few schools in unique circumstances.

“This is the reality, year after year, for huge numbers of schools and trusts in all corners of the country,” she said.

Ms Harnden warned that it was “neither healthy nor sustainable” for schools to be “constantly looking over their shoulder” and worrying about rising costs or the next partially funded pay award.

The Department for Education was contacted for comment.