ASCL survey reveals soaring cost of supply teachers

A survey of secondary school headteachers has found that more than 70% have increased their spending on agency supply teachers over the past three years and that the teacher recruitment crisis is a major factor in driving up costs.

The survey by the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) shows that many schools have to use agency supply staff not just to provide cover for teacher absence but because they are struggling to recruit permanent teachers.

ASCL General Secretary Geoff Barton will be speaking today (Saturday 10 March) at our annual conference in Birmingham about the urgent need to improve teacher recruitment and retention.

The survey of 322 headteachers of state-sector secondary schools in England found that almost all of them (97%) have used agency supply teachers in the past 12 months, and that two thirds (66%) have had to do so to cover vacancies caused by difficulty in recruiting permanent staff.

The survey also shows:

• ·       71% (228 respondents) said they have had to increase or significantly increase the amount they spend on agency supply teachers over the past three years.

• ·       The main reasons for this increased expenditure were greater reliance upon supply agencies because of difficulties in recruiting permanent teachers, with 53% (171 respondents) citing this as a factor, and increased supply agency fees, with 54% (173 respondents) saying this was a factor.

• ·       82% (264 respondents) said the daily rate for hiring an agency supply teacher was more expensive than it would cost for an equivalent permanent teacher, and 42% (135 respondents) said it was over 10% more expensive.
• ·       74% (237 respondents) spent between 1% and 5% of their school budget on agency supply teachers over the past 12 months. Nearly a fifth (17%) spent between 6% and 10%. In an average-size secondary on minimum funding in 2018-19 that equates to between £261,000 and £435,000. Nineteen respondents spent more than 10%.

ASCL has also been concerned for some time that recruitment agencies are encouraging trainees on initial teacher training programmes to sign up with them rather than applying directly to schools. The trainees are then offered to schools – who will often be desperate for recruits – and a fee is charged to the school if the trainee is appointed.

In our survey, one third (33%) of headteachers said they were aware of trainees in their area being offered inducements to join agencies. Some headteachers said this took the form of agencies offering cash incentives, laptops and tablets, while others said agencies told trainees that signing with them guaranteed a job, and that it would be easier than applying to schools.

ASCL is calling on the government to take action over this issue by considering the scope for regulation and asking initial teacher training programme providers to advise trainees that they should not sign up with recruitment agencies.

Schools are also charged a ‘finder’s fee’ if they want to take on an agency supply teacher as a full-time member of staff. Nearly three quarters of respondents (73%) said they had done so over the past 12 months, with 48% saying that the ‘finder’s fee’ had been £5,000 or more.

The government is planning to set up a pool of supply teacher agencies which follow standard levels of practice, including the use of ‘finder’s fees’, and which will be available to schools to use from September. 

Figures from the Crown Commercial Service, which is developing this commercial framework, show the cost of hiring all types of supply teachers – agencies, local authority pools and directly hired – rose by 35% between 2011 and 2015. In 2015, 70% of this expenditure – £869 million – was for supply teachers provided through agencies. (See editor’s notes for further details).

Many schools are experiencing significant difficulties in recruiting teachers. The government has missed its target for recruitment to initial teacher training programmes for secondary schools for the past five years in a row. In 2017/18, only 80% of the target was achieved, meaning a shortfall of 3,731 trainee teachers.

Over the next five years, many more teachers will be needed because the total number of pupils in England’s schools is expected to increase by 492,000 – with 391,000 more in secondary schools. (See editor’s notes for further details).

ASCL General Secretary Geoff Barton said: “While there are good supply agencies which provide a valued service to schools, it is clear that charges and quality are variable and we welcome government plans to set up a pool of trusted agencies.

“We also desperately need a solution to the teacher recruitment and retention crisis which is driving up the use of supply teachers. Children must have permanent teachers who know them and understand their needs. It is also an exorbitant cost on schools, and the taxpayer, to have to fill vacancies in this way.

“We need a partnership between the government, school leaders and professional associations  to find ways of making teaching a more attractive career. We must tackle high levels of teacher workload, improve career progression, adopt flexible working practices, tell a better and more positive story about the profession we love, and simplify routes into teaching.

“To the government’s credit, it has recognised these issues and is talking with ASCL about solutions. But there is a long way to go and we also urgently need action to improve teacher pay which has been badly hit by years of pay freezes and caps.”

Headteachers’ comments

We asked headteachers, who have had to use agency supply teachers because of difficulties in recruiting permanent teachers, what impact it has had on the quality of education. Here are some of the responses.

• ·       “Inevitably, the use of agency supply teachers does not support our drive for providing high-quality teaching. It can have a huge impact on learning and behaviour when students do not have permanent staff who know them and understand their needs.”
  
  
• ·       “Having a temporary member of staff in a department, whether it is short-term or long-term, has a significant impact on the quality of education provided. Also of huge concern, is the extra workload and stress put on subject leaders, as they have to monitor much more closely what is being delivered and how it is delivered. They’re often having to provide detailed lesson plans, and also have to pick up the pieces, follow up with students and often answer to parents’ concerns too. This is in addition to ongoing accountability regarding student outcomes. This is all out of their control and therefore particularly stressful.”
  
  
• ·       “Recruitment to science has been increasingly difficult over the past two years and still is. As a rule, I do not like recruiting from agencies because of the costs involved if you want to take on the teacher full-time. Adverts are not pulling in high-quality graduates. A recent advert had three applicants and we shortlisted two. Of the two, one didn’t turn up for the interview and the other wasn’t suitable. This is typical.”
  
  
• ·       “Recruitment in schools with low Ofsted ratings is increasingly difficult. This is especially the case when looking for subject leads in English and mathematics. The absolute focus on data in a system that favours more able students’ results in aspirational leaders not wanting to join schools where circumstances make it almost impossible to be regarded as successful.”
  
  
• ·       “We regularly place complete strangers in our classrooms to cover absences and vacancies. The quality of their teaching varies considerably. We provide feedback on poor-quality teachers and do not have them back in school and yet their names appear again and again, often advertised through multiple agencies.”

• ·       “Agency teachers do not stay for long enough to develop meaningful relationships with children. Learning depends on good relationships.”
  
  
• ·       “Agencies are recruiting high-quality graduates therefore taking them out of the market, forcing schools to pay a finder's fee. I have recruited two newly qualified teachers this way over the past two years, both of whom were well qualified and are very good teachers. There is no reason for them to be with an agency – if they had applied through normal recruitment channels they would have got the job.”

About the survey

This was an online survey circulated to the headteachers of state-sector secondary schools in England by email in February 2018. It was completed by 322 headteachers. Most respondents (66%) are headteachers of academies, with 24% from maintained schools, and the remainder from grammar schools or voluntary controlled/ aided schools.

Editor’s notes:

Figures on the rising cost of employing supply teachers can be found in this briefing by the Crown Commercial Service. See the REC presentation 1 March 2017.

The Department for Education’s Initial Teacher Training Census: trainee number census – 2017 to 2018 contains statistics about the number of trainees recruited by target. See Table 1c.

The Department for Education’s National pupil projections: July 2017 contains statistics about rising pupil numbers. See table 1.