Issuu on Google+

Hertford Infant and Nursery School Pupil Premium Report for 2012/13: Introduction; Pupil premium funding is targeted mainly at: Children from low income families who are known to be eligible for free school meals; Children who are, or have been, in receipt of free school meals in the last 6 years (ever 6 FSM) Children who have been looked after (CLA) continuously for more than 6 months, and Children whose parents are currently in the armed forces

In 2012/13 we did not have any children being looked after or armed forces children. Therefore, the group focused on in this report is children eligible and/or in receipt of free school meals. This report outlines how Hertford Infant and Nursery School has used its pupil premium during the period 4 th September 2012 and the 24th July 2013.


Overview of the school

Number of pupils and pupil premium grant (PPG) received

Total number of pupils on roll

216

Total number of pupils eligible for PPG

48

Amount of PPG received per pupil

600

Total amount of PPG received

31,150

School Performance of disadvantaged pupils 2012-13 (pupils eligible for free school meals or in local authority care for at least six months during that last 6 years)

2


FSM

NON-FSM

VARIANC E

APS Reading

16.5

17.9

1.3

APS Writing

14.7

16.2

1.5

APS Maths

16.4

17.1

0.7

National Performance of disadvantaged pupils 2012-13 (pupils eligible for free school meals or in local authority care for at least six months during that last 6 years)

FSM

NON-FSM

VARIANC E

APS Reading

14.8

16.8

2.0

APS Writing

13.5

15.5

2.0

APS Maths

14.8

16.5

1.7

3


Summary of PPG spending 2012/13 Objectives in spending PPG: Spending was focussed on key interventions, where low literacy or mathematics attainment had been identified and, in line with our SDP, maths has been a key focus for QFT and closing the gap; this is evident in our APS variance. Early intervention with regards to pastoral support for families has been a focus and 1:1 counselling or nurture for individuals/small groups has been in place. Summary of spending and actions taken: Supporting FSM children is often complex incorporating work with a variety of agencies and often addressing home issues, attendance and possibly behaviour as well as looking at learning needs

We have invested £645 in an Educational Home School Liaison Officer who has supported the school when reviewing our attendance and , together , we have put in two referrals to the ITF for specific families who do not meet thresholds for ACAS or where CAFs are unsuccessful ( due to attendance) The families now have family coaches supporting them. Spending was spread across a range of time-limited interventions. It was also used to part-fund counselling, learning mentor support. Frequently, where there hasn’t been a significant impact on learning progress, you will find excellent examples of families reengaging with school or perhaps attendance being greatly improved, putting children in a much better place for learning. Attached is a case study of a family who has received counselling support. The role of the Learning Mentor is being developed, with the support of BILT (LA service) and we now have a measure of impact based on a questionnaire for child, parent and teacher pre and post intervention.

Outcomes to date: Please see pages 4-5 Proposed actions 2013-14: Continuation of this year’s interventions- training new ECaR Teacher Continuation of training for EY Staff ( School Start) Continuation of training for KS1 Staff (FFT and BRP) To analyse FSM/Non-FSM EMAS support To subsidise after school clubs, breakfast club, enrichment opportunities for FSM children Consult other local schools regarding their rationale when spending of PPG; can we send children to clubs they are offering, open dialogue about enrichment days etc CPD for teachers Resources for specific interventions

4


1. FSM children attainment compared to non-FSM children attainment in APS levels All subjects Average APS

2011

2012

2013

School

National

School

National

School

National

All FSM

13.9

13.5

14.7

14.1

15.9

14.3

All Non-FSM

17.0

15.7

17.0

16.1

17

16.3

Reading Averag e APS

2011

2012

2013

Schoo l

Nationa l

Differenc e

Schoo l

Nationa l

Differenc e

Schoo l

Nationa l

Differenc e

All FSM

14.8

13.9

+0.9

16.2

14.4

+1.8

16.5

14.8

+1.7

All NonFSM

17.6

16.2

+1.4

17.8

16.6

+1.2

17.9

16.8

+1.1

Writing Averag e APS

2011

2012

2013

Schoo l

Nationa l

Differenc e

Schoo l

Nationa l

Differenc e

Schoo l

Nationa l

Differenc e

All FSM

13.1

12.6

+0.5

14.3

13.2

+1.1

14.7

13.5

+1.2

All NonFSM

16.1

14.9

+1.2

16.2

15.2

+1

16.2

15.5

+0.7

Maths Average APS

2011

2012

2013

5


School

National

Difference

School

National

Difference

School

National

Difference

All FSM

13.9

14.1

- 0.2

16.1

14.6

+1.5

16.4

14.8

+1.6

All NonFSM

17.2

16.1

+1.1

17.2

16.4

+0.8

17.1

16.5

+0.6

Reading

Writing

Maths

HIANS FSM

HIANS NonFSM

Difference

HIANS FSM

HIANS NonFSM

Difference

HIANS FSM

HIANS NonFSM

Difference

2011

14.8

17.6

- 2.8

13.1

16.1

-3

13.9

17.2

- 3.3

2012

16.2

17.8

- 1.6

14.3

16.2

- 1.9

16.1

17.2

- 1.1

2013

16.5

17.9

- 1.4

14.7

16.2

- 1. 5

16.4

17.1

- 0.7

What is the attainment data telling us? Our FSM and Non-FSM achieve higher APS than the national average in all subjects This trend has been maintained over 3 years apart from Maths in 2011 The attainment gap between FSM and Non FSM has narrowed over the 3 years in all subjects, most significantly in Maths. This indicates that the targeted support provided is having a positive impact by the end of KS1.

6


Pupil premium reporting 2012 2013