As the Morrison government continues to battle with states over whether schools should open, and if so whether Australians should let their children attend, a disparity has arisen which threatens Catholic and independent schools and their students.
Years of pushing choice in kindergarten to year 12 education, especially by conservative governments, has meant growth in both the Catholic school system — increasingly used by non-Catholics — and the independent sector.
The Catholic system makes up about 18% of the K-12 school population, and independent schools 15%.
Independent schools are predominantly faith-based; significant networks are run by the Anglican, Uniting, Seventh Day Adventist and Presbyterian churches, as well as various Jewish, Muslim, Baptist and evangelical Christian schools.
There is also a large group of non-denominational independent secular schools and niche players such as Montessori and Steiner.
At non-profit schools that spend virtually everything they receive each year on staff, utilities and maintenance, there is not a lot of fat to cut if parents cannot pay fees when they lose their jobs. They will be forced to cut staff. They want certainty about government funding next year so that doesn’t have to happen.
Payments to independent and Catholic schools from federal and state governments are set on the so-called annual census date of August. But if parents remove their children before then because they are financially stressed, the schools will lose not only fees paid by parents, but also Commonwealth and possibly state and territory funding for the whole year.
And this is beginning to happen as job losses hit families who stretch themselves to pay fees, often at low-fee-paying regional and suburban private schools.
Most of them are effectively excluded from the JobKeeper allowance because, unlike charities, they have to demonstrate a 30% reduction in turnover
So a gap has emerged between low-fee-paying independent schools and their more wealthy counterparts.
For instance, the Nambucca Valley Christian Community School’s funding page shows it received $14,700 for each student from state and federal governments in 2018 and about $3000 a student from parents and other private sources — that is, less than 20% of its income.
Another low- to middle-SES independent school is the Al Faisal College in Auburn, Sydney. It received $12,100 for each student in government funding in 2018 and $2609 from parents and other private sources, so its government/private percentage split is 82/18.
On the other hand, a wealthy private school such as Cranbrook School in Sydney raised more than $38,000 each student from parents and other private sources in 2018, and received about $3700 from both levels of government. So more than 90% of its income came from private sources.
If its private revenue falls by 30%, Cranbrook, a non-profit charity (only not-for-profit schools can receive government funding), would be eligible for the JobKeeper allowance to help it keep its staff.
A 30% revenue fall is far more likely for schools such as Cranbrook because most of their revenue comes from parents, and parents may well vote with their feet as things get tight.
The story is different for Nambucca Valley Christian Community School and Al-Faisal as funding for both — most of which is from government — will be maintained, so any drop in revenue will be only from the small proportion provided by parents and other private sources.
Unlike Cranbrook, there is no way they will be able to access JobKeeper because their revenue cannot fall by 30%.
“[Nambucca Valley Christian Community School] fully supports the government’s stated position and directives that schools have an obligation to remain open,” its principal, Jeff Allen, told Crikey.
“To know that the operation of a school could have this funding certainty with no less money being asked for from the Australian government would help preserve and sustain the enrolment bases of schools all across Australia.
“We need certainty so we can open our schools when the government want us to in May.
“First, we need to be assessed in relation to a count of students pre the COVID-19 pandemic — either late January or February 2020 — to provide certainty. [Second], while failing revenues may trigger eligibility for JobKeeper for some high-fee schools, it is unlikely to help us at all.”
At a time of great instability and upheavals, it would seem counterproductive to allow independent schools to cut back on staff or even close, forcing students to shift to state schools unprepared to take on the numbers.
It is worth noting that changing the census date to the pre-COVID start of the academic year would not add to the total of students or the total spend by the government on regular payments.
The Association of Independent Schools wants the government to bring forward the next of its three-part payments to independent schools from October to June. The government pays 50% of the year’s total based on student/class numbers in February, 25% in June and 25% in October.
Allowing independent schools to apply for the JobKeeper payment if, like charities, they suffer a 15% loss will save jobs and provide certainty. Shifting the census date to the start of the school year will cost the government nothing but will ensure schools remain open.
It looks like a no-brainer.
To be blunt, non-public schools are terrible and I don’t particularly care if they die.
That funding should be put in public schools where the students that are withdrawn from these private schools are going once parents pull em out.
And on the topic of jobs… public schools typically have good union jobs with good conditions. An expanded public sector is better than using public money to prop up exclusive schools who generally don’t respect organised labor or their workforce.
Though to clarify, ALL workers should receive jobkeeper if they’re stood down.
According to recent posts on Insight govt and non-government schools receive nearly the same amt of funding per student. Let the non-gov schools manage or let them go. The govt. subsidizing of non-gov. schools is a disgrace.
Murgatroyd, all students (regardless of sector) are funded to the same measure – the Schooling Resource Standard, or SRS. In round figures, it’s almost $15,000 per secondary student and $12,000 per primary student, plus extra funding for 6 types of disadvantage.
Government schools have their SRS fully funded by both levels of government. Non-government schools must raise a portion of their SRS privately, based on the average wealth of their parents.
If, as Insight says, there isn’t much difference between the level of government funding for all sectors, it’s because non-government schools have far more students from low and middle income families than most people realise. Less than 10% of non-government schools would be ‘high fee, elite’ schools.
In fact, there are more students from wealthy families in government schools. Just look at the public primary and high schools in high SES suburbs. They aren’t filled with students who come from far away, low SES suburbs.
I am very surprised to read this article from your South East Asian correspondent. It reads like a press release from the private schools lobby rather than your usual quality analysis.
The elite private schools particularly should receive no funding at all. They have used the windfall they have received since Howard changed the SES funding model to build opulent campuses and try to outcompete each other with state-of-art-facilities for everything. They are wealthy enough to weather this pandemic. They shouldn’t be getting any government funding at all, let alone a bail-out.
With respect JMNO, this is a common misconception.
The funding model you refer to relates only to RECURRENT funding, ie the annual funding that pays for staff, power, water, general maintenance.
The “opulent campuses” and “state-of-art-facilities” are paid for by CAPITAL funding, which is raised privately by elite schools from parents, benefactors, etc. Government don’t give elite schools funding for these sorts of projects.
Not true. The private schools also have access to a Commonwealth program for capital funding which provides many more millions of dollars each year.
Boccan, you’re right. So how much government funding are we talking about and which schools received it?
In 2018, NSW independent schools spent $768 million on capital works, of which only $26 million was from government.
Only schools serving lower socioeconomic families (ie, those unable to raise funds for school improvement) receive any government funding towards their capital projects.
No it doesn’t. But if the Government pays all the recurrent costs then they can use the tax-deductible contributions of parents to build their opulent campuses. I live near about 10 such schools and have watched as they construct state of the art drama buildings and music buildings and instituted cradle to leaving campuses with the best facilities. Primary and Early Learning Centres which the government sector can only dream of.
And doesn’t private mean private as in not government? That is what it used to mean. Now man ‘private’ schools get almost as much government funding as state schools.
And it is interesting that the elite private schools are all faith-based and yet they have no problem accepting money to run exclusive, selective schools at the expense of the most disadvantaged in the community. Not terribly Christian of the Christian private schools.
1. Government doesn’t pay all the recurrent costs. Schools serving the poorest communities can only ever receive 90% of the SRS from government. Most get much less than this.
2. As I’ve mentioned in another post, NSW independent schools spent $768 million on capital works in 2018, of which only $26 million was from government. That government funding went to the schools educating the poorest kids.
3. Some ‘private’ schools do indeed get almost as much government funding as state schools. That’s because of the funding model brought in by Julia Gillard which sets the same funding target for all students, then discounts it for non-govt schools based on parents’ wealth. Those getting “almost as much” as government schools are serving the poorest communities. All government schools receive the same funding whether they serve poor or wealthy communities.
4. Most schools you describe as ‘elite’ are faith-based. They were established up to 2 centuries ago without any government funding and educated the poor. But the decline in religious nuns and brothers (who taught for free) meant professional teachers (who don’t work for free) had to be employed, raising the cost of education. Staff represent 75% of school costs.
5. All selective schools are government owned and operated. There are hundreds of non-government schools that serve disadvantaged communities. It’s a myth that they’re all located in wealthy suburbs. 90% of independent schools are not ‘elite’ high fee schools.
There are two classes, roughly, of private schools, the elite and the the ones that get almost the same amount of government funding as state schools (about 5% less).
The elite private schools do not need government funding and shouldn’t get it. They used not to.
The ones that get pretty much the same funding as government schools (and sometimes more) should join the government system which should be able to accommodate different types of schools as happens in countries like the UK.
At the moment government schools are accountable for the government funding they get whereas private schools can run their schools as they wish (subject to some guidelines) and they can be selective as to who they enrol.
So there are massive amount of government money going to a private sector that can offer a ‘superior’ education, tailor their programs and select their students and there is a grossly underfunded public ‘government’ education system which educates students from widely different background and with widely different needs and a whole lot less money to do it with. And given the circumstances they do a pretty good job.
One only has to read how the private system can educate its students online during the lockdown whilst the state system struggles because of its lack of resources in order to see the difference between the two.
As I understand it, ‘private’ schools are about to get MORE increased funding from Morrison.
I don’t think it is correct to say that govt and non govt schools get similar funding per student, sometimes read of govt schools getting far less.
Why is there always a distinction made in language between Catholic and independent schools? Surely most are faith based, and those that are not should be the distinction that is made.