Funding Allocation and Equity Analysis
SPENCER JONES made this Official Information request to The Treasury
Currently waiting for a response from The Treasury, they must respond promptly and normally no later than (details and exceptions).
From: SPENCER JONES
Funding Allocation and Equity Analysis
To: Treasury
Request:
Please provide:
1. Total cost modelling for principal curriculum/NCEA change allowances.
2. Any cost modelling for additional teacher release time to support curriculum refresh implementation.
3. Any analysis of cost implications if CRT eligibility were extended to teachers below 0.8 FTTE.
4. Any advice regarding the fiscal trade-offs between direct remuneration (allowances) and non-remunerative supports (PLD/resources).
Kind regards,
SPENCER JONES
From: Ministerial Services Inbox [TSY]
The Treasury
Kia ora Spencer
Thank you for your request under the Official Information Act 1982, which was received on 25 February 2026. A response will be provided in accordance with the Act.
The Treasury may publish the response to your Official Information Act (OIA) request. When you are provided with a response to this request, you will be informed about whether the response to your OIA request will be published. If the Treasury does publish the response to your OIA request, personal information, including your name and contact details, will be removed. This publication process does not apply to extension letters or transfers.
Ngā mihi
Ministerial Advisor | Te Tai Ōhanga The Treasury
Ministerial Advisory Service
treasury.govt.nz | LinkedIn | Youtube
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this email is confidential to the Treasury, intended only for the addressee(s), and may also be legally privileged. If you are not an intended addressee:
a. please immediately delete this email and notify the Treasury by return email or telephone (64 4 472 2733);
b. any use, dissemination or copying of this email is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
show quoted sections
From: Ministerial Services Inbox [TSY]
The Treasury
Kia ora Spencer
Please find attached correspondence related to your request for
information from the Treasury.
Ngâ mihi
Ministerial Advisor | Te Tai Ôhanga – The Treasury
Email/IM: [1][The Treasury request email]
Visit us online at [2]https://treasury.govt.nz/ and follow us on
[3]Twitter, [4]LinkedIn and [5]Instagram
[IN-CONFIDENCE]
Link: [6]File-List
Link: [7]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [8]themeData
Link: [9]colorSchemeMapping
show quoted sections
From: Enquiries National
[UNCLASSIFIED]
Kia ora Spencer
Thank you for your information request which was transferred to the
Ministry of Education on 11 March 2026, requesting the following
information:
Please provide:
1. Total cost modelling for principal curriculum/NCEA change
allowances.
2. Any cost modelling for additional teacher release time to
support curriculum refresh implementation.
3. Any analysis of cost implications if CRT eligibility were
extended to teachers below 0.8 FTTE.
4. Any advice regarding the fiscal trade-offs between direct
remuneration (allowances) and non-remunerative supports (PLD/resources).
The Ministry will consider and respond to your request in accordance with
the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act).
Under section 15(1) of the Act, we are required to make and inform you of
our decision on your request as soon as reasonably practicable and in any
case not later than 20 working days after the day on which your request is
received. You can therefore expect to receive our decision on your request
on or before the 10^th of April 2026. If more than 20 working days are
needed due to the potential workload and/or consultations involved in
answering your request, we will notify you accordingly.
Please note, the Ministry may publicly release on our website the response
to your request five days after you have received it. Any personal
information will be removed.
In the interim, if you have any questions about your request, please email
[1][email address].
Ngā mihi
Enquiries National Team | Te Tāhuhu o te Mātauranga | Ministry of
Education | IB
National Office, 1 The Terrace, Wellington
[2]education.govt.nz
He mea tārai e mātou te mātauranga kia rangatira ai, kia mana taurite ai
ōna huanga
We shape an education system that delivers equitable and excellent
outcomes
[3][IMG]
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence (note: this contains the same information already available above).
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this requestAct on what you've learnt
Similar requests
CRT Eligibility Threshold and Curriculum Implementation Workload – Advice and Engagement with NZEI
To Erica Stanford by SPENCER JONES
Breakdown of NEX Funding Use by Science-Related Subject Associations
To Ministry of Education by Kelly
SPENCER JONES left an annotation ()
Public Annotation – Funding Allocation and Equity Analysis (Governance Context)
This request seeks existing documentation relating to funding allocation decisions and any accompanying equity analysis.
The purpose is not to challenge policy objectives or programme intent. It is to understand whether documented equity assessment informed funding distribution.
When funding is allocated across sectors, regions, or population groups, governance best practice typically includes:
1️⃣ Allocation methodology documentation;
2️⃣ Distributional impact analysis;
3️⃣ Equity modelling or weighting considerations;
4️⃣ Risk assessment of unintended disparities;
5️⃣ Advice provided to Ministers concerning trade-offs.
This request seeks to clarify whether such documentation exists in relation to the funding decisions in question.
⸻
Why this is governance-relevant
Funding allocation decisions have structural consequences. Even where overall funding increases, distribution methodology determines:
• Which regions benefit;
• Which service types expand;
• Whether smaller providers experience differential impact;
• Whether historically underserved groups receive proportional investment.
An equity analysis (if undertaken) would typically identify:
• Geographic distribution effects;
• Workforce capacity constraints;
• Socioeconomic weighting factors;
• Population-need adjustments;
• Risk mitigation for unintended funding disparities.
If equity modelling exists, its release provides transparency regarding the analytical basis of funding decisions.
If no equity modelling or documented analysis exists, that absence is also governance-relevant, as it clarifies the decision-making framework applied.
⸻
What a substantively complete response would include
A complete response would ideally identify:
• Funding allocation frameworks or methodology papers;
• Internal modelling or distribution spreadsheets;
• Equity impact assessments;
• Briefings referencing distributional trade-offs;
• Cabinet or Ministerial advice discussing allocation methodology.
If information is partially held across multiple business units, identification of those units assists transparency.
If reliance is placed on publicly available budget documents only, confirmation of that scope would be useful.
⸻
Clarifying scope (to avoid drift)
This request:
• Does not require new modelling to be created;
• Does not request individual provider-level financial detail;
• Does not seek commentary on political decision-making;
• Is limited strictly to existing documentation concerning funding allocation methodology and equity assessment.
⸻
Broader governance context
Equity analysis in funding allocation is not inherently controversial. It is a routine element of modern public finance governance.
Transparency in this area supports:
• Public confidence in allocation fairness;
• Clarity regarding analytical rigour;
• Understanding of how trade-offs were considered;
• Assurance that funding decisions align with stated equity objectives.
I will update this thread once a substantive response has been received.
Link to this