A REVIEW of education funding could see money from well-off schools redistributed to poorer ones in deprived areas of the county.

Oxfordshire County Council has become increasingly worried about the number of schools that are sitting on millions of pounds that it says could be used to improve education standards.

And with the council warning parents and schools to brace themselves for likely cuts in school funding from central government, County Hall says it is anxious to see money more “fairly distributed”.

A review, focusing on both primary and secondary schools, was agreed by the county council cabinet on Tuesday. A report to councillors said it would seek to find a new funding formula “to reflect the additional cost of serving the most deprived communities”.

The report, by director for children Janet Tomlinson, warned: “A disproportionate number of schools serving disadvantaged communities are judged as failing and have deficit budgets, causing significant financial costs to the council.

“Any new formula should address the council priorities of raising achievement and narrowing the gap in performance between advantaged and disadvantaged pupils.”

As well as trying to cut the number of schools “causing concern”, she said the council also needed to ensure value for money by putting resources into the most needy schools.

She said: “As current financial circumstances are likely to result in a decrease to the size of the overall fund, it is even more important to ensure the sum available is fairly distributed without wastage.”

The prospect of the biggest redistribution of funding for 20 years risks creating divisions in county schools between haves and have nots.

Schools with healthy balances say they will be reluctant to lose money set aside for planned projects, while heads like Susan Tranter, of Abingdon’s Fitzharrys School, say priority must be given to today’s children.

Ms Tranter said: “Money that goes into our schools is for the pupils currently at the school. It should not be saved or used for projects other than those involving children currently in the system. Schools do not need these large amounts. They demonstrate that by not spending it.

“Having this review should find a way of putting money into the system for today’s children in Oxfordshire and youngsters with special need and disadvantaged backgrounds.”

She said it would help schools like hers and others in Abingdon and Didcot, which were under intense financial pressure because of falling rolls.

Ms Tranter admitted it was inevitable that some schools would be unhappy to see excess balances disappear, saying: “I suppose it is human nature.

“But schools must look more broadly at the demands and entitlement of every child.”

But Andrew Hamilton, head of Bartholomew School, Eynsham, said it was essential schools were not penalised for planning.

He said: “We have a three-year budget here. So you must have some leeway to allow schools to plan properly. If you are planning to place an ICT network infrastructure, you will not be able to fund it from one year’s funds.”

He said sometimes schools were left with money when spending plans had to be cancelled through no fault of their own.

His school has had to scrap plans for a biomass boiler because of the withdrawal of a county council contribution.

Last year County Hall estimated that the county’s schools held £14m in excess of Government guidelines in bank accounts.

A county council spokesman said: “The present formula was originally developed 20 years ago. It is now in need of a fundamental review.”

Councils are funded for schools according to a national formula under which they receive a funding rate per pupil.

Schools are then funded via a local formula, and it is this element that councillors have agreed to review. The review should be completed by late summer.