Creating Value In Schools
Please enjoy this free content - for more Need To Know articles please consider a subscription
The SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) funding system in the UK is facing a major crisis, with insufficient funding for many local authorities to meet their statutory duties. Schools struggle to provide for a growing proportion of students with increasingly complex needs. We look at the developing situation and what schools might do to support their students who have additional needs.
Nobody working in a school will be unaware of the developing crisis around provision for students with additional needs. School leaders, already juggling with teacher recruitment and escalating costs, are struggling to meet the needs of what seems like a significant uptick both in numbers of pupils with additional needs and the apparent complexity of some problems.
If there is one thing on which government, unions, parents and teachers agree on, it is that SEND provision is in urgent need of reform. The problem is not so much deciding what that reform will look like, so much as how to get there from here while maintaining the integrity of provision. The DfE has made some initial moves which might help. Announcing a Plan for Change, £740 million is being invested by the government to deliver adaptations, expand specialist units in mainstream and create new places in special schools.
A recent report funded by the County Councils Network (CCN) and the Local Government Association supports the generally accepted view that whole-scale change is needed. Here are some likely changes:
Significantly increase on-site SEND provision in mainstream schools. The increased use of integrated resource provision (IRP) can be realised in schools through targeted use of high-needs funding, expansion into disused classrooms and greater flexibility in how pupils access the IRP. Much of this hinges on access to funding but, seen in association with the other points below, offers a realistic reform.
End profit-making SEND schools. The current lack of capacity in the state sector means that more and more pupils are being sent to expensive private provision. These schools could be taken into the state system with some private schools only used as partners providing specialist services. This would reduce the size of the private sector and therefore impact on the use of SEN Tribunals to force local authorities to pay for independent provision and associated transport costs.
Ensure MATs include a special school. With MATs now being the largest grouping of school provision, a ‘blended MAT’, that would include a specialist SEND school enables other schools in the MAT to access this hub and for the specialist staff to engage in outreach work across the MAT.
Get support into schools before an EHCP is needed. When Every Child Matters was current, education, health and welfare agencies worked together. The Parliamentary Education Committee heard evidence from experts in speech and language, psychology and health that cuts funding to Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) would negatively impact SEND provision locally. Improving SEND in schools will benefit from much greater co-working with health, psychology and education. This will enable support to be rapidly put in place and pupils’ progress closely monitored.
Make SEND training part of the NPQH. With SEND such a vital element in the work of every school, those who aspire to headship could be required to take an NPQ in SEND, either as part of, or supplementary to the NPQH.
Give SENCOs guaranteed access to ongoing CPD. Evidence suggests that SENCos are overstretched and under pressure. Both the Anna Freud Charity and The National Education Union have made the case for greater access to ongoing training for SENCOs and for a reduction in their workload.
Replace the tribunal with a simpler and cheaper statutory system. The current judicially based tribunal system is costly and time consuming. If these changes are implemented, there will still be a need for some kind of regulatory appeal mechanism such as a SEN ombudsman. While a simpler, slimmer process would reduce legal costs for all involved, an adjudicator must still have the power to direct placements.
It is of vital importance that leaders and governors have a strategic plan for what is bound to be a turbulent time. Here are some questions for discussion at board and SLT level. Keep a record of consultations to use in later discussion with your MAT, your local authority, RISE and OFSTED:
