Is this fraud & should I report it?

cockaleekee

Ames wrote: »

But it says entitlement, not the actual meals.

It's like how someone can have an underlying entitlement to carer's allowance, for instance, without being able to get the actual money. They'd still get the extras, like NI contributions. In this case, the parents are being asked to apply for entitlement to free school meals, without necessarily getting the food, but the school gets the extras, in the form of the pupil premium which goes into the overall school budget.

The issue is it does not specify what entitlement the school is telling the parent to apply for. If someone did not have knowledge of the PP, they could quite reasonably take the statement as the school telling them to apply for money for meals the child does not have.

Naf

pmlindyloo wrote: »

I suppose that, as someone else has said, some people may not be aware that they are entitled to free school meals and even though the child has packed lunch may take up their entitlement to school meals later.

In which case their entitlement, and therefore the payments , begins when the child actually starts having them (again, just like HB; no rent, no benefit).

Saturnalia wrote: »

The funding comes from two different pots. If the child is eligible for free meals and the parents claim them and the child eats them, the money to fund the meals is a different area to the Pupil Premium.

The school's entitlement to PP money is decided by how many families can claim free meals. The school can't ask families for data on their finances, so asking them to claim the free meals if they fit the criteria to do so is a way around that and provides proof that X number of families are poor.

So none of this is fraud. It is a means of getting the school the funding it needs, and I don't see how anyone could begrudge a school with a high number of disadvantaged pupils getting extra funds.

The parents are being asked to make a claim for a benefit they are entitled to get, and the school is gathering data to claim the money it is entitled to. No fraud in this anywhere.

You still don't seem to be understanding; all the school need for the data on PP is for parents who would be eligible, but are not taking up the benefit of free school meals, to come forward and let the school know, so the school can claim the PP.
I don't begrudge the school getting PP at all (well, maybe a little now that I know how poorly they faired at Ofstead so clearly aren't doing a good job with the money); I do begrudge people fraudulently claiming money they are not entitled to, and especially don't like the school encouraging it.
The school do not check the eligibility for school meals themselves; they forward the claim form to the local authority who checks the TC database and adds the child to the list to be paid out. To receive the PP, the child does not need to be receiving the free school meals; they could be having a packed lunch; their family only need to fit the same eligibility criteria.
The way the letter is worded from the school is asking parents to make a claim for the free school meals, even if they are not eating them; not just come forward to say they are eligible.

Naf

cockaleekee wrote: »

I can see your point Naf. It is either a case of a poorly worded letter, in that the school wishes to claim the premium for those eligible for school dinners, or that they are claiming for meals that are not being provided. The former is legitimate, the latter is certainly not.

Precisely my point; the letter very much indicated the latter (IMO).

Ames wrote: »

But it says entitlement, not the actual meals.

It's like how someone can have an underlying entitlement to carer's allowance, for instance, without being able to get the actual money. They'd still get the extras, like NI contributions. In this case, the parents are being asked to apply for entitlement to free school meals, without necessarily getting the food, but the school gets the extras, in the form of the pupil premium which goes into the overall school budget.

But the form for the school meals, once complete and processed, will pay out for the meals, because the parents are telling the LA that their child is having the meals. The LA don't know who actually eats and who doesn't, all they know is who claims and who doesn't, and pays out on that basis.

cockaleekee wrote: »

The issue is it does not specify what entitlement the school is telling the parent to apply for. If someone did not have knowledge of the PP, they could quite reasonably take the statement as the school telling them to apply for money for meals the child does not have.

Precisely my point (and my position before the thread as I didn't know about the PP beforehand), thanks.

Spendless

Naf wrote: »

It literally says;


Applying requires a parent to sign to say they want their child to receive free school meals. If its just that its badly worded, no wonder the place failed its Ofstead...

Both my kids schools sent letters out worded exactly the same and one of them goes to an Ofsted Outstanding school, so you can't really blame their Ofsted report.

The pupil premium benefits a school that has children eligible for free school dinners.

If your child is eligible you can also have a free school dinner if you wish to do so.

The pupil premium isn't to pay for a school dinner that pupils aren't receiving and the school uses on something else. It's to give money to a school per x how many children it has eligible for them.

It's been explained several times to you, so I don't really understand what you're not grasping.:cool:

Saturnalia

Naf wrote: »

You still don't seem to be understanding; all the school need for the data on PP is for parents who would be eligible, but are not taking up the benefit of free school meals, to come forward and let the school know, so the school can claim the PP.
I don't begrudge the school getting PP at all (well, maybe a little now that I know how poorly they faired at Ofstead so clearly aren't doing a good job with the money); I do begrudge people fraudulently claiming money they are not entitled to, and especially don't like the school encouraging it.
The school do not check the eligibility for school meals themselves; they forward the claim form to the local authority who checks the TC database and adds the child to the list to be paid out. To receive the PP, the child does not need to be receiving the free school meals; they could be having a packed lunch; their family only need to fit the same eligibility criteria.
The way the letter is worded from the school is asking parents to make a claim for the free school meals, even if they are not eating them; not just come forward to say they are eligible.

Exactly - the Local Authority assesses the claim form to work out whether the family is eligible for free school meals. If yes, it doesn't mean you have to claim the meals, simply that you are entitled to.

If they didn't do it this way, any parent could say "I'm entitled" couldn't they? The LEA isn't going to take the school and parents' word for it when allocating pupil premium, as with any other benefit they will ask to see proof of the claimant's entitlement, and the school meals claim form serves that purpose.

Again, a family who can get free meals if they wish to means they are low-income and the school will get PP for having this child on their register. And the free meals eligibility is proof of the child's status which allows the school to access funds they are entitled to get. No-one is committing a fraud.

And as far as I remember from school, they took a register of who was having school dinner that week and ordered the right number from that. So a free meal that isn't claimed isn't going to be ordered and isn't going to be paid for.

Naf

Spendless wrote: »

...The pupil premium isn't to pay for a school dinner ...

It's been explained several times to you, so I don't really understand what you're not grasping.:cool:

I KNOW!!

But this pupil premium is not what the parents are claiming to pay for their childrens' meals.
The school is entitled to the PP regardless of whether the child has a school meal or not; BUT THE PARENTS ARE ONLY ENTITLED TO CLAIM FREE SCHOOL MEALS IF THE CHILD IS HAVING A SCHOOL MEAL.
I really don't understand what it is that you're not grasping abot my question!

plum2002

Naf wrote: »

I KNOW!!

But this pupil premium is not what the parents are claiming to pay for their childrens' meals.
The school is entitled to the PP regardless of whether the child has a school meal or not; BUT THE PARENTS ARE ONLY ENTITLED TO CLAIM FREE SCHOOL MEALS IF THE CHILD IS HAVING A SCHOOL MEAL.
I really don't understand what it is that you're not grasping abot my question!

I don't understand, what do the parents gain by applying for school meals but not actually using them, ie because they are giving their child/ren packed lunches. How is it fraud if they don't benefit from it?

Naf

plum2002 wrote: »

I don't understand, what do the parents gain by applying for school meals but not actually using them, ie because they are giving their child/ren packed lunches. How is it fraud if they don't benefit from it?

Because they're claiming something they're not entitled to. The school gets the money for them, even if the child doesn't actually eat them; so someone is benefitting, even if not the claimant.

custardy

Naf wrote: »

Because they're claiming something they're not entitled to. The school gets the money for them, even if the child doesn't actually eat them; so someone is benefitting, even if not the claimant.

yes the claimants and non claimants children
the people paying into the kitty that pays for the schools

missapril75

clearingout wrote: »

It is NOTHING to do with free school meals. Each child in school who is ELIGIBLE for free school meals means that the school is ELIGIBLE for extra funding for the school's overall funding 'pot'.

So it IS something to do with free school meals then.

Eligibility (whether the nosh available is taken or not) is the important factor.