Historical Pupil Premium

Pupil premium strategy statement (Crook Primary School 2017-18)

1. Summary information
School	Crook Primary
Academic Year	2017-18	Total PP budget	£207700	Date of most recent PP Review	06.09.17
Total number of pupils	386(Jan census) Sept 2017 - 363	Number of pupils eligible for PP	162(42%) Sept 2017 138 (38%)	Date for next internal review of this strategy	July 2018

2. Current attainment
	Pupils eligible for PP (your school)	Pupils not eligible for PP (national average)
% achieving in reading, writing and maths	38%	61%
% making progress in reading	73%	71%
% making progress in writing	42%	76%
% making progress in maths	50%	75%

3. Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP, including high ability)
In-school barriers (issues to be addressed in school, such as poor oral language skills)
A.		Historical low on entry abilities particularly around speech and language and social skills.
B.		Increasing % of SEN pupils and pupils with social, emotional and mental health issues
C.		High % of FSM pupils in certain cohorts eg y2 – 52% and higher than national proportion of boys in the school.
External barriers (issues which also require action outside school, such as low attendance rates)
D.		High social deprivation – majority of pupils live in the bottom 30% of the most deprived areas in the country. This results in low aspirations and a negative attitude towards education by some parents and pupils. Low adult literacy means many pupils receive little support from home.
E.		Few opportunities for cultural and life experiences to develop and stimulate a love of learning.
F.		Low attendance rates especially persistent absences among vulnerable pupils impact on learning.
4. Desired outcomes
	Desired outcomes and how they will be measured		Success criteria
A.	Improve outcomes for PP children in both attainment and progress and narrow gaps in reading and maths. Improve feedback to impact on outcomes		The % of pupils working at ARE and exceeding increases in all cohorts. The % of PP children working at greater depth in maths is in line with NA(20%) at KS1. The % of PP children working at greater depth will increase in all areas compared to 2017 data in KS2. Books support the positive impact of feedback on the quality of the work.
B.	Improve outcomes particularly in writing across the school for PP pupils. Use outdoor activities to enrich the curriculum and stimulate and interest pupils.		Increase attainment at end of KS2 . ARE in writing increases by 20% to 65% The % of PP pupils working at greater depth also increases. Increase attainment at ARE the end of KS1 to 65% in writing. Increase the % of pupils working at ARE in all year groups compared to 2017 data.
C.	Provide counselling for specific vulnerable children to improve confidence, resilience and self regulation.		Identified pupils improve their resilience, are more prepared to tackle problems independently and work with confidence. This is reflected in increased progress shown in books and tracking.
D.	PSA to work with vulnerable families to reduce external barriers, improve attendance, reduce persistent absences and increase parental involvement.		PA data shows an improving picture for PP pupils. Parents attend planned sessions, both whole school events and individual meetings and become more active in supporting their children. PP SEN children make improved progress.

5. Planned expenditure
Academic year	2017 -18
The three headings below enable schools to demonstrate how they are using the pupil premium to improve classroom pedagogy, provide targeted support and support whole school strategies.
i. Quality of teaching for all
Desired outcome	Chosen action / approach	What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	Staff lead	When will you review implementation?
Improve outcomes for PP children in both attainment and progress and narrow gaps. The % of PP children working at greater depth in maths is in line with NA(20%) and in writing it will increase at KS1. The % of PP children working at greater depth will increase in all areas compared to 2017 data.	Peer tutoring Targeted intervention by teachers in identified year groups including for more able PP children. Maintain small groups in EYFS, Y1 and Y6 and target MA PP pupils.	Analysis of data is showing improved progress across the school of PP children but attainment varies compared to NA. Although attainment has improved, gaps between PP and non PP remain due to the fact that attainment of non PP children has continued to improve.	Monitoring every half term of interventions. Review of data at PP meetings. Monitoring of interventions through learning walks and intervention trackers.	AHT	Every half term Gov body meeting Pupil progress meetings. Phase leader discussions half termly.
Improve feedback to impact on outcomes	Introduce time for pupil/ teacher conferencing. Ownership of targets by children. Specific attainment based targets used to close gaps in learning.	Monitoring of books has revealed that limited opportunities are provided for pupils to review and self improve their work in some classes. Pupils lack confidence in talking about their learning.	Work scrutiny, moderation sessions, CPD	SLT and literacy lead	Termly PP meetings and half termly monitoring activities.
Total budgeted cost					£22,974.80
ii. Targeted support
Desired outcome	Chosen action/approach	What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	Staff lead	When will you review implementation?
Improve outcomes in writing across the school for PP pupils. Increase attainment of End of Y6 pupils at ARE in writing by 20% to 65% Increase attainment at ARE the end of KS1 to 65% in writing.	4 Additional teachers working with identified pupils in Y2,3,4,5,6 Develop outdoor learning adventures linked to improving literacy.( 3 day training course) LA support for EEF writing project. Provide more bespoke curriculum for SEN PP children to allow progress to be tracked more effectively and narrow gaps.	Analysis of data shows that attainment and progress in writing across the school is lower than in reading and maths. Analysis of data shows attainment and progress for SEN PP pupils is low. Small steps not currently being tracked. Pupils’ feedback from questionnaires indicated that writing was their least favourite subject.	Rigorous monitoring. Annual monitoring programme involving leaders at all levels. Learning walks, work scrutiny, data analysis and lesson observations. Termly focused Pupil Progress meetings. SEN support plan reviews and meetings.	SLT and literacy lead AHT	Half termly Monitoring programme SEN meetings and reviews.
Total budgeted cost					£129,862.5
iii. Other approaches
Desired outcome	Chosen action/approach	What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	Staff lead	When will you review implementation?
Provide counselling for specific vulnerable children to improve confidence, resilience and self regulation.	Counselling service and Time to Talk interventions Nurture group programme carried out 3 days a week with identified children.	External barriers impact on social and emotional readiness for learning. The number of pupils with social and emotional needs in increasing year on year.	AHT to monitor and review every half term with TA working on Time to Talk. HT to monitor work of counsellor and ensure correct children receives the help required.	AHT	Every half term. Report to gov body termly.
PSA to work with vulnerable families to reduce external barriers, improve attendance, reduce persistent absences and increase parental involvement.	PSA working in school 0.6 Attendance officer to target PP low attendance and PA. Employment of attendance officer	Analysis of attendance data and needs of vulnerable families shows need for PSA and Attendance officer. PA is higher than NA for PP pupils.	HT to monitor – ongoing PSA and attendance officer report to HT on a regular basis. Govs monitor attendance data every term.	HT and PSA	Every half term Weekly – attendance discussions. Gov body meetings.
Total budgeted cost					£ 54,862.70
Total budget cost for Pupil premium strategy					£207,700

6. Review of expenditure
Previous Academic Year 2016-17
i. Quality of teaching for all
Desired outcome	Chosen action/approach	Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.	Lessons learned (and whether you will continue with this approach)	Cost
Improve outcomes in reading	Provide regular reading groups from Y1 to Y6 to improve comprehension skills. Daily reading KS1 3X weekly KS2	Outcomes for reading improved at the end KS2 for all pupils and improved by 35% for PP pupils in Y6 and 19% improvement in Y1.	Continue with small groups in Y6 and phonics teaching in Y1 as these strategies worked well It is more effective to use a teacher for reading rather than targeted TA support.	£48781
ii. Targeted support
Desired outcome	Chosen action/approach	Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.	Lessons learned (and whether you will continue with this approach)	Cost
More PP pupils to reach combined greater depth high outcomes	Additional support for PP more able pupils to increase confidence and work on mastery of subjects.	Increased % of children exceeding age related expectations at KS2.	This approach enhanced their learning and developed mastery of the curriculum however this year we have other priorities such as writing across the school.	£114781
Improve outcomes for PP pupils	Extra teachers and staff for Interventions, booster, individual targeted support through TA and teachers.	In some year groups attainment of PP children has improved and across the school progress has increased.	We have refined interventions for 2017 – 18 because not all were effective. This year some interventions will be led by teaching staff and HLTAs.	£114781
iii. Other approaches
Desired outcome	Chosen action/approach	Estimated impact: Did you meet the success criteria? Include impact on pupils not eligible for PP, if appropriate.	Lessons learned (and whether you will continue with this approach)	Cost
Children and families gain emotional stability and resilience to enable children to learn. Families are well support.	Provide counselling and nurture provision. PSA support and new therapeutic interventions to be used on identified pupils. Further monitor attendance and respond to findings.	Increased number of pupils arriving at school on time. Children more able to self regulate emotions in order to access learning. More families referred to attendance improvement team. Increased involvement for targeted families.	This approach will be continued through our new nurture provision in order to embed the whole approach for greater impact on attendance and improved mental health.	£197918

Pupil Premium 2016-17

1. Summary information
School	Crook Primary School
Academic Year	2016-17	Total PP budget	£ 197,360	Date of most recent PP Review	20/1/2017
Total number of pupils	383 plus 58 nurser nnursery	Number of pupils eligible for PP	39%	Date for next internal review of this strategy	09/17

2. Current attainment
Y6 2015/2016			Pupils eligible for PP (your school)		Pupils not eligible for PP (national average)
% reaching age related expectations in Reading, Writing and Maths			48%		60%
% meeting standard or above in reading			65%		71%
% meeting standard or above in writing			65%		79%
% meeting standard or above in maths			65%		75%
Y2 2015/2016
% meeting standard or above in reading			63%		78%
% meeting standard or above in writing			63%		70%
% meeting standard or above in maths			63%		77%
3. Barriers to future attainment (for pupils eligible for PP)
In-school barriers
		PP pupils generally have few independent learning strategies so require highly structured and scaffolded lessons. Too few PP pupils reach combined outcomes for: English reading, writing and mathematics.
		Separate nursery provision led to historically weak starting points entering into reception. Too few MAP PP exceed GLD Transition from EYFS development groups expected and exceeding to KS1 for PP pupils is lower in the following areas: reading –exceeding GLD to greater depth respectively writing – expected and exceeding GLD to greater depth mathematics – expected and exceeding GLD to greater depth Transition from KS1 to KS2 to high standard
		Emotional readiness for learning – lacking confidence and resilience. Mental wellbeing
External barriers
		Limited access to wider enrichment / language activities.
		Persistent absenteeism for PP pupils
		Mobility – inward and outward
		Varied nursery provision resulting in low on entry data.
4. Desired outcomes (Desired outcomes and how they will be measured)				Success criteria
	To secure quality first teaching for disadvantaged pupils and raise standards PP pupils are identified in each year group within class profiles and cross reference with SEN Those PP pupils whose prior attainment would indicate they should reach expected standard in all subjects, will receive targeted intervention to ensure they reach combined outcomes. Pupil progress meetings analyse assessment outcomes of key groups – referring back to starting points to analyse historical gaps and how well they are reducing..			Attainment improves and gaps narrow when compared to 2016
	Transition from KS1 to KS2 demonstrates that more disadvantaged pupils reach the high standard than 2016.			Greater proportion of PP EYFS group reach greater depth at end of KS1
	Provide therapeutic services and nurture provision for vulnerable PP pupils.			Targeted pupils show more resilience in lessons and are more able to access learning in the classroom environment.
	Attendance – reducing the proportion of disadvantaged persistent absenteeism across the school. Of the pupils with attendance below 90%, 75% are identified PPG pupils			Reduce PA on disadvantaged pupils

5. Planned expenditure
· Academic year		2016 -2017
The three headings below enable schools to demonstrate how they are using the Pupil Premium to improve classroom pedagogy, provide targeted support and support whole school strategies
1. Quality of teaching for all
Desired outcome	Chosen action / approach		What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	Staff lead	When will you review implementation?
	Detailed cohort files identify PP pupils, including more able. Targets are set at the beginning of the academic year for end of year outcomes that show accelerated progress to enable more pupils to reach combined attainment outcomes and higher standard		Research from The Sutton Trust has shown that good teachers have the most direct impact on student outcomes. Teachers were not fully aware of the impact of mobility upon the size and dynamic of pupils groups.	Termly pupil progress meetings Inclusion manager ensures all mobility is tracked and recorded within cohort files and staffs are informed of pupil movement.	HT DHT AHT	termly
	Speech and oral language interventions including resources to help self regulation and independence.		Lesson observation of PP pupils identified that classrooms were not supporting pupils’ independently learning effectively. Learning walls were not accessible for PP pupils and therefore to supporting. Resources were not easily accessible for pupils	Monitoring Staff training	SLT	Spring Term
	Remove RWI. Adjust the teaching sequence of phonemes so that PP pupil have access to all sounds before screening		Limited access to quality talk within the home resulted in PP pupils lower phonics screening outcomes Highly structured RWI approach to writing limited PPG exposure to quality text and writing styles.	Monitoring Staff training	SLT	Spring term and summer term review of results
	3X Y6 classes Reduce class size		Reduce class size to address high proportion of PP within the cohort (46%) Outcomes low and gap wide for PP and other pupils	Monitoring	SLT	Spring term and summer term review of results
Resource management and monitoring costs Additional teacher Y6 Additional support Year 1 phonics intervention PPG
Total budgeted cost						£ 48781

i. Targeted support
Desired outcome	Chosen action / approach	What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	Staff lead	When will you review implementation?
	Reading individual targeted support for PP pupils in all year groups from Y1 to Y6 Daily reading KS1 3X weekly KS2	Secure expected standards for those PP pupils who were below at EYFS and KS1. Reading records indicate that PP pupils are not heard to read daily at home	Monitoring on a termly basis through assessment review and data collection	SLT	April ‘17 July’17
	Additional support for PP more able pupils to ensure they receive enrichment activities to develop verbal reasoning skills – link with Durham university	More PP pupils to reach combined greater depth / high outcomes	Monitoring on a termly basis through data collection	SLT	April ‘17 July’17
	Booster Class Y6 Afternoon additional basic skills 1X week Maths class Y2 & Y6 - 2 X hour per week	Bespoke support dedicated to the needs of individual pupils addresses misconceptions quickly and counters underachievement.	Analysis of data collection	DHT + Y6	July ‘17
	Dedicated TA support delivering interventions	Support for: Lexia Reading intervention – word wasp and hornet Lego therapy – 4X 30 min weekly sessions Memory therapy – 4X30min weekly Relaxation S&L therapy – bespoke for individuals PP	Analysis of data collection	AHT Inclusion	April 17
	Additional 2X TA in YR to reduce key worker groups	Weaker historical AOE data Introduction of key worker system high proportion of PP with limited language	Assessment observation	DHT	April 17 GLD
TA employed full time to hear readers Targeted member of staff for enrichment (half costs) Targeted member of staff for language development / intervention Additional HTLA in Y2 to take focus group of PPG pupil to narrow all subjects 0.5 2X TA to reduce key worker group for PPG pupils
Total budgeted cost					114781

ii. Other approaches
Desired outcome	Chosen action / approach	What is the evidence and rationale for this choice?	How will you ensure it is implemented well?	Staff lead	When will you review implementation?
	Appointed designated member of SLT for review of PP pupils	Increasing PP pupils, increasing number of PP ever6 Variable gaps within assessment across the school	Outcomes academic BOXALL assessment entry exit	AHT	Performance management review and final assessment
	Develop nurture facility on site -	Access to outdoor learning provision Targeted PPG emotional readiness for learning barrier to learning Improving attention	Improved mental health	AHT	Awaiting LA build Plans approved
	PSA - targeted to PP families to improve attendance and punctuality ad raise the importance of 3X days weekly	Many of our disadvantaged pupils have high PA than other pupils targeted to improve levels of attendance to impact upon their academic achievement.	This will be monitored termly through attendance and punctuality reviews	PSA & HT	April ‘17 July’17
	Induction programme in place for mobility	66% of all school mobility is associated with PP pupils Need for accurate on entry assessment information and establishment of school expectations	Attendance and punctuality monitored Emotional BOXALL assessment to ensure transition procedures are smooth	AHT	ongoing
	Pupils have access to therapeutic services including counselling	This provides support for social and emotional needs.	Targeted pupils will be tracked through data collection cycles Reduced number of behavioural incidents recorded	AHT -inclusion	April ‘17 July’17
Total budgeted cost					_34,356
Overall Spend					_197,918

Pupil Premium 2015-16

Crook Primary was given £194,940 for the academic year 2015-16 for pupil premium. This money was used to fund support for vulnerable children in the following ways:

To provide PSA support two and a half days per week	£13,329.50
Additional teacher in year 6 to narrow the gap by reducing class sizes.	£46,560
Additional part time teacher for intervention KS1	£28,657
Additional EYFS support to reduce size of key worker groups for pupil premium children	£40,308
Additional part time teacher for intervention KS 2	£27,567
To employ an HLTA pupil premium children to develop resilience and emotional well being	£24,982
Additional support in Year 1 to close the gap for pupil premium children with phonics	£20, 151

Impact of Pupil Premium

The Parent Support Advisor has worked closely to support vulnerable families and as a school we have developed resilience and well- being to support vulnerable children. The “Relax Kids” approach has been introduced by the HLTA and we have a weekly resilience award.

Extra support in EYFS ensured that the “Good Level of Development” increased from 49% to 64%. Investment in read, Write, Inc as well as intervention groups and Read, Write Inc Lead Teacher ensured that in Year 1 phonics increased to 80% from 60%. 77% of pupil premium children passed the test compared to 82% of non -pupil premium children.

These intervention strategies also impacted on results in Year 2. Of the Pupil Premium children who were present in EYFS, 100% made expected progress in Reading with 61% making more than expected. 50% achieved a 2A+.

In writing. 100% made expected progress with 61% making more than expected. 33% achieved a 2A+.

In Maths based on Number results in EYFS, 100% made expected with 89% making more than expected.62% achieved a 2A+.

Year 6 results showed a similar picture of good progress for pupil premium children due to a high level of intervention. Gaps were minimal between FSM and Non FSM children at level 4 and progress in line with national expectations at level 5 from 2014 data. There is a gap in attainment between FSM and non FSM at level 5. However, 25% of FSM children are SEN compared to 9% of non FSM.

In reading 94% of FSM children achieved a level 4 compared to 91% of non FSM. 25% of FSM children achieved a level 5 compared to 35% of non FSM. 100% of FSM children made expected progress with 38% making more than expected. 97% of non FSM children made expected progress with 41% making more than expected.

In writing 88 % of FSM children achieved a level 4 compared to 97% of non FSM. 25% of FSM children achieved a level 5 compared to 53% of non FSM. 100% of FSM children made expected progress with 31% making more than expected. 100% of non FSM children made expected progress with 62% making more than expected.

In maths 94 % of FSM children achieved a level 4 compared to 94% of non FSM. 13% of FSM children achieved a level 5 compared to 47% of non FSM. 94% of FSM children made expected progress with 31% making more than expected. 94% of non FSM children made expected progress with 53% making more than expected.