{"id":246852,"date":"2026-05-21T23:00:55","date_gmt":"2026-05-21T22:00:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/?p=246852"},"modified":"2026-05-22T15:57:27","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T14:57:27","slug":"council-wants-safety-valve-cash-back-in-dfe-deficit-write-off","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/council-wants-safety-valve-cash-back-in-dfe-deficit-write-off\/","title":{"rendered":"Council wants ‘safety valve’ cash back in DfE deficit write-off"},"content":{"rendered":"

A cash-strapped council has warned it will be \u201cdisadvantaged\u201d if the government\u2019s SEND deficits write-off grant does not reimburse its contributions to the controversial \u201csafety valve\u201d programme.<\/p>\n

Ministers are offering town halls a high needs stability grant<\/a>, which will wipe out 90 per cent of SEND deficits accrued as of the end of March. In return, councils will need to take steps to implement the government\u2019s SEND reforms.<\/p>\n

The previous government\u2019s safety valve (SV) scheme, which saw deficit-riddled councils handed extra government funding in exchange for measures to reduce costs, came to an end in March.<\/p>\n

As part of the agreements, some councils had to dip into their general fund, which does not ordinarily fund schools, to shore up their dedicated schools grant (DSG) budgets.<\/p>\n

\u00a33.6m contributed<\/h2>\n

While other safety valve councils have welcomed the write off, North Tyneside council has claimed the current approach would leave it at a \u201cdisadvantage\u201d compared to non-safety valve councils because it had paid \u00a33.6 million from its general fund into its agreement before it ended in March.<\/p>\n

The council, which has a \u00a312.4 million deficit, said it had asked for its contribution to \u201cform part of the high needs stability grant calculation\u201d. In practice, this would mean \u00a33.25 million, or 90 per cent of the council\u2019s contribution, being repaid, it said.<\/p>\n

North Tyneside said its request was made \u201con the basis that without these contributions the deficit would have been significantly higher than the current position\u201d.<\/p>\n

The request also reflected \u201cthe principle that councils with a safety valve agreement will be treated equitably with other councils and will not be disadvantaged by their participation in the safety valve programme\u201d.<\/p>\n

North Tyneside said the government \u201chas suggested that general fund costs will not be taken into account in the calculation of the high needs stability grant.<\/p>\n

\u201cHowever, we remain in discussions on this point as we feel this approach means that the council is disadvantaged as a result of its participation in the safety valve programme, having made significant direct contributions from its general fund to reduce the DSG deficit, which contradicts the earlier principle and intention.”<\/p>\n

However, Department for Education (DfE) guidance for the high needs stability grant insists the write off is \u201cmore generous than the support most local authorities would have received\u201d, and that no town hall \u201cwill be disadvantaged by its participation\u201d in the SV scheme.<\/p>\n

Worse off?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Rachel Filmer, co-founder of Save Our Children\u2019s Rights campaign, said: \u201cCouncils continue to argue over financial fairness, but children and families have paid the price for safety valve, whether their council joined the scheme or not.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is impossible to state whether LAs would be better or worse off had they not joined the scheme, given the impact of targets and DfE payments.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt does seem likely that councils who had contributions from general funds, and then had payments halted, will find themselves worse off for having signed an agreement.\u201d<\/p>\n

North Tyneside has already taken money out of its schools budget to prop up its SEND black hole.<\/p>\n

The council transferred 0.5 per cent of the schools budget \u2013 amounting to \u00a3800,000 \u2013 into its high needs block this financial year. It then applied to breach minimum funding rules<\/a> to level out the cash lost by schools.<\/p>\n

Councils had to send their draft local SEND reform plans on May 18, with final drafts due in June. If approved, they will receive the deficit write-off.<\/p>\n

Schools Week<\/em> revealed in March that the government will give top marks to councils with \u201clittle to no\u201d plans to increase special school or alternative provision capacity.<\/p>\n

But Filmer warned that the local plans \u201crisk becoming a national version of the safety valve, tied to financial conditions rather than children\u2019s needs\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

North Tyneside claims the fact it paid into the previous saving scheme makes it ‘disadvantaged’<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":315335,"featured_media":246343,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[263],"post-theme":[2354],"class_list":["post-246852","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-inclusion","post-theme-inclusion"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t