implications are for the sector.
TROUBLED FAMILIES
What was announced?
- An extra £200m to fund the extension of the Troubled Families programme to reach 400,000 families by 2015/16.
- As is currently the case, the government will cover 40 per cent of the cost of working with troubled families, with the remainder coming from councils and other agencies.
What does it mean?
The investment will see the programme - which in its first year has worked with 35,000 troubled families - expanded more than three-fold from the initial target of 120,000 families.
Reaction:
Merrick Cockell, chair of the Local Government Association: "We will be seeking clarification that this £200m is actually additional money and not redirected from existing local authority budgets."
Dame Clare Tickell: "The expansion of the programme is a welcome investment in early intervention services, which we know can help turn lives around."
EDUCATION
What was announced?
- A new national funding formula for schools will be introduced from 2015/16, which would allocate money based on pupils' needs.
- Schools budgets and pupil premium protected.
- £200m cut to the Education Services Grant (EDS) in 2015/16.
- Funding to establish 180 more free schools.
What does it mean?
Compared with the rest of Whitehall, the Department for Education as a whole escaped relatively unscathed. But the budget rise from £52.8bn in 2014/15 to £53.2bn in 2015/16 still represents a one per cent real-terms cut.
Reaction:
Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers: "Far from being protected, we have seen the biggest four-year cut in education spending since at least the 1950s, reversing the long-overdue increase under Labour."
David Simmonds, chair of the Local Government Association children and young people board: "The EDS pays for councils to help drive improvements in the classroom, tackle non-attendance and support schools in managing their finances. There will be no easy choices for local authorities to make when deciding which they can no longer afford to pay for."
WELFARE AND POVERTY
What was announced?
- The Department for Work and Pensions budget will be reduced by 9.5 per cent in 2015/16.
- An annual cap on welfare spending will be introduced from April 2015, including the amount spent on tax credits.
- Delayed eligibility for claiming jobseeker's allowance to seven days.
What does it mean?
The cuts will see £4bn slashed from the welfare bill, the government says. Charities fear that these cuts, combined with changes to the tax system planned for the next few years, will see the poorest families £1,000 a year worse off by 2015/16.
Reaction:
Matthew Reed, chief executive of the Children's Society: "The newly announced cap on welfare will shift the pain of rising rents from the government on to children and families."
Alison Garnham, chief executive of Child Poverty Action Group: "There should be no doubt this will leave more families and children cold and hungry, and push more families towards doorstep lenders and foodbanks."
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
What was announced?
- The amount government gives to local authorities is to be cut by 10 per cent to £54.5bn in 2015/16.
What does it mean?
The government claims that once other funding changes have been taken into account, the amount cut represents only 2.3 per cent, or £300m.
With many local government grants tied to specific projects and programmes, those services not ringfenced - for example, children's centres, libraries, sports and leisure - will come under intense pressure in financially strapped areas.
Reaction:
Anna Turley, senior research fellow at think-tank the IPPR North: "The Chancellor claimed that when changes affecting local government are taken into account, spending would be cut by around two per cent. It is not clear how that figure has been reached."
Jo Cleary, chair of the College of Social Work: "Our members are worried that non-statutory early intervention services, which the Munro Report highlighted as essential to helping keep children safe, could be a casualty. Reducing such support could have serious repercussions for children whose families need them, as it removes an essential level of support."
EARLY YEARS
What was announced?
- Early years provision is not included in the national schools funding formula for ages five to 16.
- The government reaffirmed its commitment to free childcare for two-year-olds from low-income households.
What does it mean?
The exclusion of early years education from the new funding formula leaves nursery provision vulnerable when local authorities start looking at where to make savings. With the extra pressure of delivering free childcare to disadvantaged two-year-olds, councils will have little room for manoeuvre.
Reaction:
Imogen Parker, researcher at the IPPR: "By ringfencing schools funding...
rather than a one per cent cut across the board, this will be concentrated in early years, early intervention projects and FE colleges, who will now face a four per cent cut in their budgets."
Denise Burke, director of United for All Ages and the Good Care Guide: "The new proposed funding formula only covers the age range five to 16. Where does this leave funding for early years? I worry that it means early years funding has fallen by the wayside and will be included in local authority funding, which has been cut."
HEALTH
What was announced?
- Extra, unspecified, funding for mental health services, including expanding psychological therapies across all age ranges, and ensuring every hospital emergency department has constant access to mental health professionals.
- Commitment to protect the NHS budget.
What does it mean?
This Spending Round goes some way to insulating the NHS from the worst of the cuts, and continues its aim to give mental health care the same priority as physical health services.
Reaction:
Charles Alessi, interim chair of NHS Clinical Commissioners: "Given the pressures that public finances face, it is positive the government have sought to protect the NHS budget."
Dr Lynne Gabriel, chair of the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy: "We welcome the government's commitment to expanding access to talking therapies, but urge that any such expansion is fit for purpose."
IN NUMBERS
£200m cut to the Education Services Grant
£4bn of welfare savings
10% Drop in the local government budget
£1,000 the amount some families will be worse off per year as a result of the changes
OVERVIEW: CUTS SHOULD HAVE AVOIDED CHILDREN
By Enver Solomon, director of evidence and impact, National Children's Bureau
In an age of austerity, we are all reminded on a regular basis that times are tough and we need to do more with less. But we also need to remember that the business of government is about spending billions of pounds every year.
Ministers make clear choices to invest or to cut. So when the Chancellor delivered his spending review, he could have decided to put children and young people at the heart of his plans for future investment. Instead, he chose to continue with further spending cuts, repeating what has become his mantra that the "greatest unfairness is loading debts onto our children that our generation didn't have the courage to tackle".
The problem with this approach, of course, is that it means children growing up today are having to bear the brunt of the most severe cuts in services and welfare support for a generation. Billions more off the welfare bill and a new ceiling on welfare spend will inevitably hit children in those families who are struggling to make ends meet. The introduction of a seven-day wait for benefits is particularly harsh as it will penalise the poorest and most vulnerable. Once again, children will suffer. Sudden falls in family income not only mean there is less to spend on the essentials, but it also impacts negatively on a child's sense of personal wellbeing.
The local services that the poorest children, young people and families rely on will also be further hit with a 10 per cent cut. The Local Government Association says this will result in provision being pushed to "breaking point in many areas". Overall in the five years to 2015/16, local authorities will have had to cope with a cumulative 29 per cent real-terms cut in expenditure - one of the largest reductions across Whitehall.
The only new money is for the Troubled Families programme, which at a few hundred million is, in reality, very little. As essential services are withdrawn, the risk is that some areas gradually become sacrifice zones - neighbourhoods that are bereft of high-quality health, early years, education and youth provision where, in effect, communities have been left to cope with the bare minimum of support.
With councils having to focus on managing even further reduced budgets, very few will be in a position to think creatively about how resources can be reconfigured so that spending is targeted more effectively on early help for those children and families who are just coping.
It is striking that the Chancellor made no mention of early intervention and it would appear that the Treasury has become increasingly sceptical of it. The case clearly still needs to be powerfully made in order to persuade the Treasury mandarins.
The Chancellor could and should have made some bold investment decisions. In Wales, there are free school breakfasts for primary school children and free swimming for all children aged 16 and under on weekends or during school holidays.
The spending review was an opportunity to do the same in England. Instead, it exposed how as a nation we are not seeking to adequately invest in our children's wellbeing. The greatest unfairness is surely not loading debts on to the young, but failing to give every child the best start in life, regardless of where they live or what home they grow up in.
Enver Solomon is director of evidence and impact at the National Children's Bureau
