The Harvey Grammar Academy: A Decade of Surpluses, Yet Where’s the Vision?
The Harvey Academy in Folkestone has quietly accumulated more than £2.2 million in cumulative reserves between 2015 and 2024. While the school has never run a deficit in that period — posting annual surpluses every single year — the question remains: why has so little of this financial cushion been reinvested in students, support, or the broader school environment?
Between 2015 and 2024, The Harvey Academy generated annual surpluses ranging from £103,443 to £212,310. In total, this equates to over £1.57 million in net income above expenditure, a remarkable achievement in the age of austerity and rising costs in the education sector. These surpluses have driven a rise in the school’s reserves from £805,000 in 2015 to £2,183,999 in 2024.
It’s important to note that not all of that £2.2 million is cash in the bank. According to the 2024 financial statements, the breakdown of total funds is as follows:
- Restricted fixed asset funds: £14,801,885 (value of land, buildings, and equipment)
- Restricted general funds: £94,212 (grants tied to specific use like SEND or pupil premium)
- Unrestricted funds: £475,244 (the only part freely spendable by trustees)
- Endowment fund: £175,724 (historical capital held in trust)
The confusion often arises from assuming all reserves are available for spending. In reality, the only flexible portion is the unrestricted fund. And while £475,244 may pale in comparison to the headline figure, it is still substantial. To be precise:
- It represents just over 3% of the Academy’s total reserves (£475,244 out of £15.5 million),
- And it equates to approximately 4.5% of the Academy’s annual income.
That 4.5% figure is particularly important. For a single-school academy, £475,244 is more than enough to:
- Hire additional support or wellbeing staff
- Fund enrichment or extracurricular programmes
- Launch new teaching and learning initiatives
- Improve pastoral care provision
- Cover temporary funding shortfalls or cost spikes
Yet there is no evidence in the trustees’ reports that any such reinvestment has taken place at scale.
Another theme throughout the last ten years is repetition. The same strategic goals are published annually: maintain standards, support pupils, ensure strong governance. These are noble aims, but where is the innovation? The courage to expand, adapt, or lead?
With capacity maxed out at around 1,025 pupils, there is little ambition shown to serve more of the community or extend the school’s reach. Governance, too, remains static, with key trustees serving since at least 2015.
What the numbers show is a school with impeccable balance sheets but underwhelming strategic vision. It has the money. It has the trust. But it seems to lack the will to make bold investments in its students’ futures.
Surpluses are not a problem. Neither are reserves. But in a public school system stretched to its limits, banking money while pupils face rising pressures is a political and moral choice — not just a financial one.
The Shepway Vox Team
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” – George Orwell
What a strange article. No mention of the school’s recent confirmation of its Oustanding School status which bears quoting in part: Leaders have exceedingly high expectations of the school. Sixth-form leaders are knowledgeable and determined. The leadership of the headteacher is exceptional and he is competently supported by his senior leaders and the governing board. The school has strong links with neighbouring primary schools and other grammar schools. Leaders at all levels are supported through highly effective line management, coaching support and access to appropriate training. School leaders have considered workload and teachers are mostly positive about this. Staff work hard and feel proud to be associated with the school. Relationships with parents are incredibly positive. Almost all parents and carers say they would recommend the school to other parents. The governing board work cooperatively together and have a strong oversight of the school. Governors understand their roles and carry these out commendably. They are passionate about the school and advocate strongly for its status as a local grammarschool for local children. Governors ensure that safeguarding is a priority.
A Report to be proud of which answers all the criticisms here, and focuses on what the school is about – education. What does the strange comment that capacity is maxed out with little little ambition to expand. No mention that the school expanded its intake by 20% five years ago, or that it expanded yet again in 2023 to six forms of entry. No mention that its attendance record is the highest of any grammar school in the county which speaks volumes about its effectiveness. No mention that a surplus of £475,244 in Unrestricted Funds is not an exceptional Kent grammar school surplus, which should surely have been checked out before wandering into this stratosphere of unfulfilled ambitions. I spent this morning visiting an academy at the other end of Kent that has just been landed with a £100,000 bill for the first part of a new school roof, even before the asbestos removal is accounted for. By comparison the Unrestricted Fund at Folkestone School for Girls is currently £1,372,376. Harvey’s necessary safety belt pales into insignificance beside this.
Thank you for your comment and for highlighting the recent Ofsted report, which indeed contains high praise for the Harvey Grammar School’s leadership, ethos, and educational standards. It is, as you rightly say, a report the school community can be proud of.
However, the article’s purpose was not to dispute the quality of education, which remains strong, nor to diminish the dedication of staff, governors, or students. Rather, it was to question whether the school’s financial surpluses—particularly in Unrestricted Funds—are being deployed with sufficient strategic ambition to serve the broader educational needs of Folkestone and its future cohorts.
You are correct to point out the expansion in intake over recent years, including the move to six forms of entry. This is welcomed. Yet it remains the case that despite these increases, the school has consistently reported significant surpluses year after year. The article simply asks: beyond financial prudence, where is the long-term vision for investing those surpluses to enhance facilities, innovate curricula, or extend outreach to underserved communities?
The comparison with other schools facing urgent capital repairs is a poignant one. But it also underscores the argument: if The Harvey is in a relatively strong financial position, could it not take a leadership role in shaping educational opportunity more broadly within the district?
Surpluses are not, in themselves, a sign of failure—far from it. But when they become routine and substantial, and are not clearly tied to publicly visible future investments, it is fair for local stakeholders to ask: what next?
Ultimately, a school can deliver both academic excellence and demonstrate forward-looking ambition. The Harvey Grammar excels in the former. This article invites discussion about the latter.