Executive Summary

This report presents the results of a voluntary survey, completed between 24 October and 1 December 2023, to determine:

1. What initiatives, practices and resources schools are implementing to help support ākonga with socio-economic barriers to reach their potential.
2. What schools have done in terms of changing practices and expenditure decisions in response to funding changes resulting from the Equity Index.

A total of n=2,313 English medium schools were invited to complete the survey, with responses received from n=770, representing a response rate of 33%.^[1]

The profile of responding schools has been examined in terms of a range of variables, including EQI band, school sector, roll size, education region and rural/urban location, and we can confirm that the achieved sample closely represents the profile of all schools invited to complete the survey. As such, weighting the data (to better represent English medium schools in general) has been deemed unnecessary.

The key results of the survey are summarised in the following sub-sections.

The response to funding changes resulting from the Equity Index

1. Most respondents stated their school used its equity funding to support ākonga in general.

   Approximately three-quarters of respondents stated their school used its equity funding ‘to support all ākonga in general, as well as ākonga with additional needs’ (75%). In contrast, 25% said they used the funding ‘exclusively to support ākonga with additional needs’.

2. More respondents stated their school gained equity funding because of the introduction of the EQI than said it lost funding.

   Approximately one-third of respondents stated their school gained (32%) equity funding because of the introduction of the EQI compared with 24% who said they lost funding. Most of the remainder stated their equity funding had remained about the same (34%), while nine percent were unsure.

3. Most respondents reported that their school had maintained or increased its use of social supports following the change to EQI.

   To measure the impact the EQI has had on how schools support ākonga, respondents were provided with a list of social supports and asked to identify which they had maintained, increased, decreased, added, dropped, or whether that support was not applicable to their school context.

   Figure 1 below shows the results for all the supports that respondents were asked about. Overall, while most respondents (58%) reported that their school was able to maintain at least one of their school’s social supports following the change to EQI, 31% stated that the change to EQI funding had enabled their school to increaseor introduce at least one new social support.

   However, 13% reported that their school had decreased or dropped at least one social support because of the change to EQI.

   Figure 1: Changes in social supports as a result of the change to the EQI
   Q3.2 (Part 2) How has the change from the Decile System to the Equity Index impacted the following social supports? (n=770)

   

4. Most respondents also stated their school’s teaching and learning supports were maintained because of the introduction of the EQI.
   
   To measure the impact the EQI has had on school’s teaching and learning supports, respondents were provided with a list of supports and asked to identify which they had maintained, increased, decreased, added, dropped, or whether that support was not applicable to their school context.
   
   Figure 2 below shows the results for all the supports that respondents were asked about.
   
   The impacts on teaching and learning supports were varied. While most respondents (81%) reported their school was able to maintain at least one of its supports following the change to EQI, other supports had been increased, introduced, decreased or dropped altogether.
   
   Figure 2: Changes in teaching and learning supports because of the change to the EQI
   Q4.1 (Part 2) How has the change from the Decile System to the Equity Index impacted the following supports for teaching and learning? (n=770)

Perceptions of the Equity Index

1. Respondents were polarised in terms of their opinions about the EQI.

   One-third of all respondents agreed that the EQI would:

   • reduce stigma associated with socio-economic status (35%)
   • result in more accurate targeting of equity funding and resources (36%)
   • and they preferred the EQI to the decile system (40%).

   However, many respondents also disagreed with these opinions (particularly the statement about reducing stigma at 37%).

   Against this background, 74% disagreed that their current EQI funding is ‘enough to meet [their school’s] needs’. Just 10% agreed with this and 14% neither agreed nor disagreed. This result should be considered in relation to the fact that 32% of respondents stated their school had gained funding because of the change to the EQI, 24% had lost funding and 34% said their school’s funding had stayed more or less the same.

   Respondents who did not agree that their EQI funding was enough to meet their needs were asked how much more funding their school would need to adequately support ākonga requiring additional social or learning support. Approximately one-in-four (26%) said they would need more than $100,000. However, the response varied and as a result, the mode falls in the $51,000 to $60,000 band.

2. Ministry-sourced information about the EQI was rated useful by less than one-half of all respondents.

   Just under one-half (43%) of all respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the information their school received from the Ministry about the EQI was helpful.

   When asked which specific sources of information were most useful, the most frequently mentioned were letters from the Ministry (61%) and the Ministry’s website (40%).

   However, 21% of respondents stated that the information their school received from the Ministry about the EQI was not helpful.

3. Almost one-half of respondents stated their school had a ‘good understanding’ of the EQI.

   More than twice as many respondents strongly agreed or agreed (47%) that their school had a good understanding of the EQI compared with the percentage who either strongly disagreed or disagreed (19%). Fifteen percent neither agreed nor disagreed and one percent said they didn’t know.
   
   When asked what information gaps exist for schools about the EQI, respondents most frequently stated they wanted:

   • more general information about the EQI (27%).
   • to know what the EQI numbers meant (24%).
   • to know how the EQI was calculated (21%).
   • to know what information was used to calculate the EQI (20%).