Presentation on theme: "1 Local Area Networking for SEN Review of Access and Inclusion Services March 2006."— Presentation transcript:
1 Local Area Networking for SEN Review of Access and Inclusion Services March 2006
2 Review of Access and Inclusion Services: Summary Over 300 staff are employed in these services: –Student Support Service –Educational Psychology Service –Special Educational Needs Assessment –Specialist Teaching Service –Access and Welfare –Parent Partnership Service The review will consider: –what services need to provided centrally in line with the LAs role –how other services can be delivered on a local area basis, aligned with our five SEN areas –whether some services would be better located in other parts of the new departmental structure The review will take part in three stages: –Stage 1: Consultation on models of future service delivery, staffing structures and action plans (completed by July 2006) –Stage 2: Appointments to new structure (completed in the Autumn, 2006) –Stage 3: Phased implementation of new structure (Completed by March 2007) A meeting of managers in the group was held on 16th March, to prepare a cabinet paper for 4th April which will begin the process. The cabinet paper will be made available to staff and professional associations on 28th March. Shortly after 4th April, detailed plans will be published for consultation, if cabinet support is gained. Cabinet approval will be sought for the plans in July/August, 2006. The review will impact on individual services in different ways. The first stage of the review will clarify how different services will be affected.
3 Themes: Leicestershire SEN Strategy: 2004 Capacity –BESD and ASD provision: Enhanced Provision in mainstream schools –SEN Delegation Coherence –Area special schools: redevelop on mainstream sites where possible –Area links between schools to share good practice –Single Point of Access to support services Confidence –Unified Inset programme –SEN Notional budgets and monitoring arrangements –Headteachers Reps on statement panel
4 Principles to inform review of Pupil Support Services Pupils, not services, come first (Every Child Matters agenda). There should be a balance of condition-focussed expertise and practical support for pupils in the context of whole school Leadership and Management and Learning and Teaching. Updates on specialist information/research need to be ensured. Practical advice should be grounded in deliverers ongoing teaching experience. There should be provision of high quality training which combines specialist knowledge and on the ground advice, which complement each other. Up-to-date resource reference facilities need to be maintained. Links with parent/carer, council and voluntary agencies need to be further developed in order to reduce friction, communication difficulties and wastage of energy in ultimately unproductive conflict. The enormous amount of money we have invested in training, e.g. SPLD, needs to be capitalised so that it impacts on pupil progress and demonstrates value for money. Review outcomes need to be imaginative to ensure best provision and maximum progress. Leadership and management structures at the centre should be highly focussed – lean, mean and accountable. The infrastructure of support will be based as close to schools as possible and well-supported. Clear systems for Monitoring and Evaluation should be established.
5 Why Change? Clearer definition of LA/school responsibilities: –Schools: Provision and extended services, 92p in the pound of available resources –LA: standards, monitoring, support for failing/under performing schools Good to great: – Lack of performance/outcomes/impact orientation – Poor communication of overall strategy –Silo structure inhibiting flexibility and creating duplication A foundation for ECM: CAF, lead professional, multi-disciplinary teams, 5 outcomes, information sharing, single point of access... Building school capacity: –Multi-disciplinary teams to focus on school systems rather than pupils –Shared pathways of care more important than diagnosis by individual services Difficulties with trading in current system: –Differential access for pupils –Complex financial planning –No Service Level Agreement
6 Continuities Children first High quality provision in schools High quality casework Maintaining professional development Maintaining expertise in SEN
7 DMT: 14/3/06 Publish one model not three Cabinet paper to start the process Wide consultation and involvement of schools and services during consultation via a group Need to engage parents with discussion Selection process not to begin until September Identify two staff to support the process
8 Scope of the Review To summarise resources currently available within Access and Inclusion Services and complete an equalities impact assessment To identify functions to be managed centrally, related to monitoring and reporting, provision standards, and support for failing schools, and policy consultation and development To recommend a future model of service delivery aligning support services with with local area delivery, and the new departmental structure To make recommendations on staffing structures, roles and responsibilities
9 Phases of the Review Phase 1- Summer 2006 –Publication of service model, staffing structure and action plans –Consultation with stakeholders –Revision of plans Phase 2- Autumn 2006 –Appointments to new structure Phase 3- Spring 2007 –Phased implementation of new arrangements
10 Timescales to start process Cabinet approval for process:* –Managers mtg 16th March, –SMT 20-24th March –Cabinet April 7th Cabinet approval for second stage: to be decided *Appointment of consultant(s) to manage the process is crucial
12 Review Documents Restructuring Advice from Personnel The area approach within Leicestershires SEN Strategy The National SEN Strategy The National SEN Adviser Report on Leicestershire OfSTED Report: Inclusion: The Impact of LEA Support and Outreach Services (2005) The DfES Five Year Strategy Review of School Staffing Structures Equality Impact Assessment Guidance on the role of Lead Professionals National Report on Low Incidence Provision ( www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR729.pdf) www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR729.pdf
13 Local Area Working: Rationale We need area working to co-ordinate the complex set of services available Special Educational Needs Assessment Service Advanced Skills Teachers for SEN Specialist Teaching Service including: Learning Support Team, Hearing Impaired service, Visual Impaired Service, Autism Outreach Service, Early Years and SEN Inclusion Team, Advisory Teacher for PD Enhanced Resource Bases being developed for BESD Unit provision for MLD, ASD, Speech and Language Difficulties Social Services Teams Parent Partnership Service Specialist Community Child Health Services including: Speech and Language Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Physiotherapy, Diana Nursing Service Area SENCO (primary only) Voluntary sector organisations Specialist Nursery Provisions Youth Offending Service Connexions Service Student Support Service including Primary PRU, Secondary PRUs, Directions Team, Looked after Childrens Education Service, Traveller Education Service, Education Welfare Service Advice and Inspection Service including SEN Inspector and SENCOs Special School outreach and Inclusion support Educational Psychology Service Family Steps Service Early Support Programme Youth Service Leicester Royal Infirmary Services
14 Lead Professional Act as a single point of contact –for the child or family, who they can trust and who can engage them in making choices, navigating their way through the system and effecting change Co-ordinate the delivery of an agreed action plan –based on the outcome of the assessment, to ensure that children and families receive an effective service which is regularly reviewed Reduce overlap and inconsistency –in the services received In many cases practitioners are already delivering these functions. We now want to ensure that they are embedded across the childrens workforce as a core aspect of the services children with additional and complex needs receive, to ensure consistency and quality in service delivery for all children and young people.
15 Lead SENCOs The Lead SENCo initiative is in place and is proving successful, particularly in 2 schools where SEN has been a key issue in OFSTED inspections and in 2 schools in a category. Below is an extended evaluation. Lead SENCOs Felt they had supported schools in practical ways. 2 felt they didnt have as many opportunities as they would have liked. 4 felt it has been a useful professional development opportunity – liaison, meeting other lead SENCOs, improving presentation skills. 4 felt it had enabled them to think about their own practice. Liaison with each other and SEN Team helped them to be successful in the role. Issues around time/diaries/other commitments were main issues. 3 felt that providing supply cover to the supported schools would be useful. All 5 are happy to continue the role and to be involved in supporting new SENCOs, if appropriate. Headteacher of Lead SENCO Benefits for the SENCO were recognition of their skills and professional development opportunities. Wider benefits to the school include reflection on own practice and sharing of good practice. Difficulties have mainly been around time/workload. Further support included attendance at relevant LEA training and joint initial visits with advisory teacher. Overall – a good experience but 1 concern about additional pressure. Supported SENCO Aspects of practice/provision changed as a result of advice: Improved differentiation. Practical ideas for inclusion. Organisational strategies. Revised IEP format. Provision mapping. Work sampling. Support has enabled more appropriate and effective learning for pupils e.g. through differentiation and better management of SEN. No further training intended as a result of the input. 1 SENCO has visited a Lead SENCO in their own setting. All felt it was very useful and provided professional and constructive advice. Some school support to continue. Headteacher of supported school Support led to improved practice and organisational strategies with particular members of staff and greater self- confidence for the SENCO. Support has led to wider whole school discussions about teaching and learning, organisation and target setting. The main factor that helped the support to be successful was the understanding and helpful attitude of the Lead SENCOs Continued support in some schools will happen next year. 1 headteacher wanted more feedback. ML Wave 3 04-05 Eval report
16 Overall Shape of New Services Key elements: A unified central SEN service Multi-professional local area teams With a role to: Monitor central SEN budgets Establish monitoring system based on SEN SEF Establish an SLA with schools for SEN support Commission service via second SLA or directly employ staff Set policy, strategy and standards, including Prof Dev for specialist staff Manage LAA, APA, JAR, CYPP, LSPs, BVPIs, CPA, etc Lead complex case panels in specialist areas of need Handle queries and complaints Support Perf Man for staff with specialist skills Agree annual support plan with each school, based on SEN SEF discussion Deploy support staff to schools Commission lead SENCOs etc in area to support work Deliver support to children, schools and families, including training, project casework Manage area, neighbourhood and school Multi- disciplinary Team Develop secondment arrangements for local staff to service for 2-3 terms Undertake monitoring work to central specification
17 Model: Commissioned Service from Area Special Schools LA has an SLA with special schools to deliver a support service to mainstream schools in the area. Central team has a role to manage complex case panels, standards and monitoring and planning Strengths –Fits area special school model –Local responsiveness to need –Strong political support for the programme –Approach called for by OFSTED (2005) Weaknesses –Will advice be independent? –Changes professional team relations: new shared identity as area team on top of professional identity LEAs should:... consider, wherever possible, delegating the funding for support services to suitable special schools within a region in order that they can deliver the service to mainstream schools on an outreach basis
18 Service Model : Commissioned Service from Area Special Schools- detail Problems Small teams tied to arbitrary boundaries that risk being inflexible to shifts in the distribution of low incidence needs. The areas of expertise currently located in area special schools does not reflect the skills and strategies required to meet the wide ranging SEN of mainstream children and young people, many of whom will not experience cognitive difficulties. Unavoidable duplication of resources Potential difficulties in defining the respective roles of local and central management. No impartial professional view creating potential for dispute and/or conflicts of interest between professionals, local and central interests. Poor co-ordination of activities and resources across the County leading to potential for inequitable provision. A continuing requirement for centralised technical support and a possibility of distancing this support from the work directly undertaken with children. Duplication of administrative tasks and/or additional pressure on administrative resources in host schools. Accommodation. No single point of contact for referrals within or outside Childrens Services with regard to SEN. Fragmented knowledge base Unclear funding streams for work not directly associated with schools, e.g. EYSENIT, VI and HI home teaching programmes, EarlyBird and Autism Outreach (Early Years) provision. Weakened opportunities for dispute resolution around individual cases. No impartial professional view creating potential for dispute/ conflicts of interest between professionals, local and central interests. Solutions Boundaries link to school groupings- flexibility between area teams Agreed: these teams would extend the expertise of area special schools There is duplication now and no coherent whole school focus Agreed- clear boundaries and roles are needed Complex case panels could do this Again, via complex case panels and central standards No data currently available on equity from service- will be done by area teams Will need centralised elements eg hearing tests and equipment- pupils have to travel now Admin support will need to be located with teams Can be included in design specification for future buildings Schools complain now that there is not a single point of contact Central team will ensure coherent knowledge base applied to schools Service level agreement will clarify what is being commissioned Complex case panels will do this work Strong argument for central complex case panels to ensure equity across county
19 Managers Meeting: 16/3/06 Challenges Capacity/accomodation on school sites How to identify lead professionals Balancing local and cross county deployment Caring for staff and maintaining motivation and morale LA- schools relationship may worsen Need for robust SLA and monitoring Service for vulnerable or service for SEN? SSS should be included Importance of teachers teaching Referral pathways Involvement of parents Long term absence in small teams Match to childrens centres and social care Equality of provision Need for speedy operation of panels First phase to include audit and equality impact assessment Solutions Some teams could be mainstream based Better engagement of voluntary sector- using services smarter Why not focus on communities rather than schools Strengths better local knowledge and accountability better collaborative work between services rather than handing cases on Better training could be delivered Teams would become more aware fo each others work Foundation for interagency work
20 Other LAs to Visit Redbridge –Longstanding Childrens Trust A/D Colin Moor 020 8708 3056 Bromley –Good workforce remodelling, totally integrated EY service. Helen Norris Head of EY and Play 020 8464 3333 Derbyshire –Generally very well organised LA. Francis James Worcestershire –Good SEF with integrated SEN. Ingrid ? Sunderland –Special Schl hub and spokes model with health. A/D Mike Golding 019 1533 1000 Salford –4 locality based teams, including EPs Cornwall –Great enthusiasm for change. A/D Steve Colwill Derby –Good strategy for childrens centres and extended schools. Rita Sylvester
21 Further Work Complete work on model, structure and plans for publication Apr 10th Undertake an audit of needs and provision Complete consultations on proposed service structure and action plans Organise visits to other LAs CP, plus senior managers (DH, TH, CB) All managers- Pat Norton to lead Pat and Danielle to lead Pat Norton to lead
22 Other LAs... Charlie, you asked us for info on how other authorities organise their SEN support services. I have a colleague in Northants. She heads a team of pre-school/Area SENCOs who operate in 4 areas within multi-disciplinary teams with teachers for children with learning difficulties in schools, HI and VI teachers and teachers who work with children with behavioural difficulties and EPs. EPs have their own Principal but the area team teachers are managed by an SEN Area Teacher Manager. My Colleague holds a monthly staff meeting for all her pre-school /Area SENCOs and Portage Service (which she also manages) and then the area multi-disciplinary teams have their own meetings. These 4 teams are based in office accommodation not schools She herself is in an office with heads of teacher teams (HI, VI etc) and her line manager is the Principal EP. He in turn is managed by the overall Head of Service. Other Teams working with vulnerable children are in a separate service. My colleague is responsible for the overall strategy for the pre-school team, deals with referrals and organises training for the providers. She is responsible for the Teams' professional development but the day to day of recording sickness, time off in lieu, travel claims etc is undertaken by the local SEN Area Teacher Manager. Having said all that, Northants have had a budget cut (£9 million) and so job losses may be on the cards and then it has been mooted that the teams will be centralised to save on accommodation resourses etc! Janis Meadowcroft, March 2006