Guernsey’s three private schools have issued the following response to the FAQ’s published by Education, Sport, and Culture, ahead of this week’s States debate on the future funding of Blanchelande, Elizabeth, and Ladies’ College:
The States FAQ can be found HERE.
Part 1 – Statements made on the Education website page:
Best use of taxpayer money
The Colleges educate 30% of secondary pupils for 3% of the full education budget. This works out at just over £2,000 per child in the independent sector versus somewhere between £11,000-£15,000 in the state sector. This outsourcing to the independent sector is not only excellent value for the taxpayer but also allows more to be spent on children being educated in state schools.
ESC says the Colleges have been able to replace Special Place Holders with full fee-paying students
Perhaps due to the current educational context, the Colleges have seen parents seeking financial support from their wider family or taking on second jobs so that they can send their child to one of the Colleges. For example, we have seen a significant rise in the number of children with SEND in the Colleges.
ESC does not believe that a phased removal of the grant necessitates an increase in fees at the Colleges
The Colleges have made it clear that any reduction in funding will lead to an increase in fees. As ESC is aware, the Colleges already run at much higher levels of efficiency than independent schools in similar cost-of-living areas in the UK. The three Colleges have shared their financial accounts and cash flow projections with ESC in separate presentations, demonstrating how significant the loss of funding would be. Whilst the Colleges requested feedback on these presentations from ESC, we did not receive a response.
ESC has claimed the States’ secondary schools could accommodate an additional 10% of secondary students (or one third of the independent sector) for £0.29 million per annum over 10 years
ESC claims that the secondary state sector can absorb a third of the secondary independent sector for only £290,000 a year averaged over 10 years. Logically, this can only be true if the state schools either have significant overcapacity or if ESC is hoping that, in response to a fall in demographics, it can maintain the size of the state sector budget by creating a situation where a large number of children in the independent sector have to move across. ESC’s position is not without significant long-term cost implications for the state sector, which do not appear to have been modelled.
Fair allocation of resources
ESC says that while education funding for state schools has declined in real terms in recent years, the Colleges’ grant aid from the States has increased.
This is not true. The Colleges’ overall grant funding will have been reduced by 50% in real terms by the 2025/2026 school year. As the funding from Special Place Holders has reduced the grant, a smaller subset of funding has increased – this was always the States’ intention when the grant was approved in 2017. Thus, the repeated assertion that our grant has increased is not the case.
According to a recent report, between 30% and 37% of households with children in independent Colleges (at junior and secondary age) are in the bottom three quintiles of equivalised gross annual income (i.e., the upper-income boundaries are £31,167 for the lowest quintile and £64,006 for the third quintile).
Spending 3% of the full education budget on 30% of the secondary students is not only excellent value for money for the taxpayer but also allows more to be spent on children in the state sector.
Fee-paying College parents pay twice: by paying their taxes to support the state sector and paying fees for their own children, with the latter saving the States money that would otherwise be needed to educate their children in the state sector.
Equity
ESC uses a single study by the Sutton Trust to say that applying UK national research to the local context suggests that grant aid to the Colleges is widening inequality in the island’s secondary education system.
This position is based on a single study that was not conducted in Guernsey, did not include independent schools and looked at the attainment gap, not attainment. It is important to draw conclusions very carefully.
Indeed, in contrast to this, the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) found that in countries where the state subsidises independent education, there are actually lower socio-economic gaps between independent and state school children. Also, the founder of the Sutton Trust himself, Sir Peter Lampl, wrote in January 2025 that we should want more children from low- and middle-income homes to have access to independent schools, not fewer.
Taxpayer funding for private businesses
ESC has repeatedly referred to the Colleges as ‘private businesses’ and said that ‘private schools operate as income-generating businesses’.
As ESC is well aware, the Colleges are not businesses. We are not-for-profit organisations whose governing bodies are unpaid volunteers and whose teachers are paid in line with the salaries set by the States of Guernsey. The deliberate use of the label ‘private businesses’ suggests we have a profit motive, which is highly misleading.
Part 2 – Frequently Asked Questions – the Colleges’ version
How much money do the Colleges currently get from the grant?
The assertion that our grant has increased is just not true. By the 2025/2026 school year, the Colleges’ overall grant funding will have been reduced by 50% in real terms. As the funding from Special Place Holders has reduced, a smaller subset of funding has increased. This was always the intention based on the States’ decision in 2017.
Why does the States currently fund the Colleges?
Funding for the Colleges goes back hundreds of years and reflects a belief that they play a key role in Guernsey’s culture and educational offering.
Guernsey has chosen to support a mixed-economy education system, which has served the island and its economy well over the years.
Will this make the Colleges more expensive?
In proposing the removal of grant funding, ESC claims that the Colleges can simply absorb this loss of funding without raising fees. This claim was very surprising for the Colleges, as ESC is aware that the Colleges operate on much tighter margins than independent schools in similar cost-of-living areas in the UK. All three Colleges have separately presented their finances and cash flow positions to ESC, demonstrating the need for funding. ESC has not provided any feedback on the information provided.
How much does it cost to educate a child in the States secondary education system?
The Colleges have not been able to confidently identify a figure confirmed as the current full cost to educate a child in the States’ secondary sector, including a capital expenditure amount.
In the Policy Letter, ESC states that the cost of educating a child in the state secondary sector is £10,065. However, that does not appear to include capital expenditure costs, and it is not clear if items from ESC’s 2025 budget, such as the Transformation cost (£1.3m) or the central services allocation from P&R (£27.6m), are included in a cost per pupil calculation.
In June 2017, PwC issued their “Costing, benchmarking and prioritisation – Report: Committees for Home Affairs and Education, Sport & Culture”. The PwC report stated a cost per secondary-age pupil of £8.8k (excluding the cost of capital and Colleges’ grant). With cumulative RPIX applied up to 2024, this gives a figure of £11,487. In the States’ debate on funding in 2017, it was suggested that an estimated amount should be added to the £8.8k cost per secondary child to account for the cost of capital – £11.5k was the estimated cost per secondary age child (including estimated cost of capital) suggested in 2017. That estimated figure would be £15,011 per secondary-age child in 2024 with RPIX applied.
A recent presentation to candidates considering standing for election included the figure of c.£15k per year to educate a child. Elsewhere, in a Rule 14 request in 2017, Deputy Richard Graham was given an average cost per secondary-age child of £10,098 (without the cost of capital); when RPIX to 2024 is applied, it gives a cost per child of £13,181.
ESC has added a further FAQ in response to the challenge over the figures in its Policy Letter. The Colleges’ position is that there are various figures relating to the cost per secondary-age child, depending on the educational setting and which elements of provision or services are included in the calculations.
The Colleges’ position is that children educated in the independent sector save the States money and the grant offers value for money for taxpayers.
Will lots of students currently at the Colleges have to move to State education due to fee increases?
ESC claims that few parents will leave the independent sector yet has stated its plans to reduce the sector’s size by a third over ten years. Thus, it is difficult to be clear on ESC’s position.
Unlike in the UK, where only 7% of the most wealthy can access independent education, in Guernsey, a much wider cohort of parents send their children to the Colleges. Recent research has shown that an estimated 30%-37% of households with children in the Colleges are in the bottom three equivalised gross annual income quintiles (i.e., with upper-income boundaries of £31,167 for the lowest quintile and £64,006 for the third quintile). Parents often seek second jobs, work overtime, and borrow money from their families to pay their fees.
Given the composition of our parent body and the recent significant increase in the cost of living, we believe that significantly more children will leave or not enter the independent sector over the next five years if funding is withdrawn. This will have long-term implications for the States’ budget and the cost of state education, including future capital investment, but it is unclear if ESC has modelled this.
Is there capacity in the States schools to accommodate extra children?
In the Policy Letter, ESC makes several assumptions. It assumes that children who move from the independent sector to the state sector would do so in an organised fashion, evenly distributed between the state schools and across year groups. ESC has not modelled for the high numbers of SEND children in the independent sector or that many parents may try to move into the catchment for their preferred secondary school, putting pressure on class sizes and creating challenges elsewhere.
Secondly, ESC claims that state schools can absorb a third of the independent secondary sector for a negligible yearly cost. Logically, this can only be true if there is significant overcapacity in the secondary schools or if ESC is hoping to maintain the size of the education budget in the face of falling demographics by creating a situation where many children from the independent sector have to move across.
Thirdly, more pupils mean more teachers at a time when teacher recruitment challenges are well documented and proving to be challenging for the state sector.
Has the Colleges’ grant aid gone down or up?
ESC asserts that the current grant has increased by over 200%. This is misleading and only true if a small section of the overall grant is considered.
In 2017, the States agreed to phase down the Colleges’ funding by 50% in real terms. To do that, as the funding from Special Place Holders reduced, a smaller subset of funding increased. By the 2025/2026 school year, the overall grant will have reduced by 50% of its original level in real terms. This will result in a cumulative saving of over £10 million for the States during this current funding period.
Will College parents be able to afford a price increase if the Colleges put their fees up?
ESC claims that few parents will leave the independent sector if the College fees increase because of the removal of the grant. This is unsubstantiated.
Between c. 30% to 37% of households with children in the independent Colleges (at primary and secondary age) are in the bottom three quintiles of equivalised gross annual income, based on a recent report (i.e., with upper-income boundaries of £31,167 for the lowest quintile and £64,006 for the third quintile). We know many parents take on additional work, receive help from other family members and make other savings to pay school fees, which is why a decrease in funding, resulting in an increase in fees, will have a detrimental effect on the whole educational landscape.
If the grant aid is withdrawn, how will the money saved be spent by the States?
Firstly, as the Colleges have demonstrated, cutting this funding is not a sustainable saving for the States. Educating children in the state sector costs taxpayers significantly more than outsourcing to the independent sector.
ESC’s position to accommodate this change without a significant cost increase can only be logically true if the state schools are currently running with significant overcapacity or that ESC is planning to maintain the size of the education budget in the face of demographic drops by moving children across from the independent sector.
There are two points to raise here:
a. ESC has not provided the alternative modelling of the savings that could be made in the state sector with the demographic drop whilst continuing to outsource at much lower cost to the independent sector. This is likely to result in much more considerable savings.
b. What happens if demographics rise again? At that point taxpayers would be funding a much more expensive system than outsourcing at a fifth of the cost to the independent sector.
Secondly, evidence shows that for every pound invested in education, a country gets significantly more back in terms of longer-term economic impact. We do not believe that education should be ‘either or’. The Policy Letter talks about moving most of the ‘saving’ across to spend on other projects in the state sector – the Colleges believe if that investment is needed, it is something that the States should consider supporting regardless.
What could a future partnership between the States and the Colleges look like?
The Colleges have always advocated fostering a genuinely collaborative education ecosystem that offers children and the island the benefits of choice, diversity, and a variety of approaches. The Colleges wholeheartedly support this approach.
Months ago, the Colleges provided ESC with a three-page document exploring ways we could build authentic and powerful collaboration between the independent and state sectors, enabling school communities to support and learn from each other. We have yet to receive a response from ESC on this document.