Christopher Robertson Next Steps: a summary of proposed DfE changes in SEND provision and the wider context; especially implications for SENCos by Christopher Robertson & Gareth D Morewood 2nd July 2012

Ideological change Economic change Inclusive education policy Broader education policy and the concept of autonomous schools (e.g. Beccles) Curriculum (‘dissent’) and assessment (‘sheep and goats’) Parents as choice makers and ‘in control’ ‘Front-line’ services Economic change

Support and Aspiration (DfE, 2011, p.4, para 4) A Radical Overhaul? ‘Our proposed reforms respond to the frustrations of children and young people and the professionals who work with them. We want to put in place a radically different system to support better life outcomes for young people; give parents confidence by giving them more control; and transfer power to professionals on the front line and to local communities.’ Support and Aspiration (DfE, 2011, p.4, para 4)

Next Steps… Training and Development Single School Category Single Assessment – EHCP Widening access to provision Local Offer – LA but schools as well? Parents/Carers – giving greater control – controversial? Personal Budgets School Funding reform Preparation for adulthood – independence SEN Pathfinders

Training and ITT… ITT is changing Lamb materials & SALT materials Teaching Agency Expert Reference Group Review of ITT SEND questionnaires Placements in Special Provision Impairment specific training Training Schools – up to 100 placements each year! National Scholarship Scheme Open market sources of CPD at a variety of levels (e.g. Autism Education Trust CPD programme) Continuation of SENCo training (+ teachers in PRUs) BUT with a new ‘DfE-mediated’ ‘first-come, first served’ application process and a reduction in the number of funded places (1000) Whole school approaches to achieving access, participation and achievement (nasen and Schools Network – involving lead SENCos; Achievement for All)

Single School Category Workshop attended earlier this month Replacement of SA and SAP with single stage – or ‘category’ Focus on outcomes not process This will then be followed by revised CoP Focus on ‘early identification’ and ensuring young people are not ‘missed’

Single Assessment & EHCP ECHP plan designed to be quicker, better integrated and clearer; especially with regard to provision and support Is this really going to be the case? Statutory safeguards same as for Statement but extended to 25 for those still being ‘taught’ (for debate?) By 2014 … How will Health and Social Care be accountable? Pathfinders still working through trials

Widening Provision Special Schools can become Academies … 28 to date (June) 3 Special Free Schools from September 2012 Is this really widening opportunities, or further segregating and fragmenting provision? Removing the bias towards inclusion in action?

The Local Offer Local Authorities to work with schools re: Local Offer … However at odds with the Academy policy and segregation of provision? This ‘offer’ should cover services/provision from 0 – 25, in line with EHCPs This ‘offer’ should also include complaints procedures and what to do when things go wrong

Clear ‘local offer’ for families with local services, including schools, outlining what is available This will be set out in law as a broad national framework (balancing consistency requirements with local policy, provision and practice) Simpler school SEND policies (curriculum, teaching, assessment, pastoral support) developed with parents

Parents Control Although the DfE states that new EHCPs will ‘…allow parents a preference to any state funded school…’ recent issues re: Academy admissions indicate significant ‘gaps’ with regard to this vision and funding agreements of ‘new schools’ Personal Budgets are to go ahead, however they will not be a wide-ranging as initially perceived

Strengthening Parental Rights? To choose the school they want for their child (‘removing the bias towards inclusion’ not referred to) To access timely integrated education, health and care support (‘solving the bureaucracy problem’) To have concerns about assessment, placement and provision addressed through mediation before recourse to more formal complaints (‘early dispute resolution’) Introducing a right of appeal for children if they are unhappy with their support (subject to pilot findings)

School Funding Reforms Aim is to make the funding more transparent Specifically with reform of funding for students with ‘high needs’ A lot of confusion and misunderstanding here Still to see what reality means here…

Preparing for Adulthood The DfE state that by 2015 young people with SEND will have: early integrated support from 0 – 25 a single assessment access to better quality vocational provision, especially post-16 job support opportunities (conflict here with demise of specific schemes?) better transition from children’s to adult services – a significant issue currently in mental health for example.

21 May 2012 SEND Pathfinders … a single education, health and care plan (EHCP) from birth to 25 years old (to improve outcomes) personal budgets for parents of disabled children and those with SEN so they can choose which services best suit the needs of their children the role of Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations and parents in coordinating a new assessment and bringing greater independence to the process strong partnership between all local services and agencies working together (pooled and aligned budgets) improved commissioning, particularly through links to health reforms (health and well-being boards) the cost of reform (value for money) mediation for parents transferability of support across area boundaries.

Pathfinder ‘options’ a national funding framework to see if this would help parents understand what level of funding is available to support their child’s needs better support to help parents the assessment process support to vulnerable children through the new assessment process the impact of reforms on children in the early years and young people aged from 16 to 25 Note: Much of the Pathfinder development work is targeted at the 2.8% of the school population with statements of SEN (224,210 pupils) rather than the 17.8% of pupils with SEN but without statements (1,449, 685 pupils)

Emerging Issues … How to ensure that changes being tested are genuinely child/young person centred How to determine who is eligible for the single assessment process and how this is linked to the local offer (in local authorities) and the work of schools What outcome focused EHCPs should include and look like (e.g. how child/young friendly should the format and content be) The timescale for completing single assessments, what review schedule is appropriate and who should be involved Accountability procedures that ‘bite’ across the range of services in the EHCP How to ensure personal budgets give families more control through the use of personal budgets across education, health and care services School involvement and knowledge of pathfinders?

Independent evaluation (SQW): Early findings (June 2012) Better support system – a risk that the introduction of a key worker and summary assessment may actually increase bureaucracy (additions to current roles/documentation) More choice, control & better outcomes – projects ‘seeking to achieve’ .... types of outcomes not yet been well defined Greater independence into the assessment system using the voluntary sector (VCS) – not been a focus of projects, the focus has been on the key worker instead Value for money – cost of change significant (even for a small number of families), cost of key worker role an addition to the system, unclear how new approaches could be scaled up and resourced

Fundamental Review of Needs: ‘key’ reform (1) Addressing the over identification of needs concern without setting a target number (Sarah Teather, R4 Today Programme, 15th May) – but through the introduction of a new single school based category (no change the way resources are allocated) Other commentators have referred to ‘as many as 450,000 children’ being taken out of the category of SEN altogether (Harris, 2012) Conceptualising high-incidence needs (already being referred to as ‘low-cost’ needs) and boundaries at both ends of this new category (‘low attainers’ and ‘borderline’ ‘low incidence’ needs)

Fundamental Review of Needs: ‘key’ reform (2) Less emphasis on BESD/SEBD and more on ‘better discipline’ and ‘better teaching’, with access to appropriate multidisciplinary support (e.g. to address emotional and mental health needs), but no reference to MLD Recognition of the importance of PRUs and the high number (79%) of pupils attending PRUs with a special educational need (Charlie Taylor report 2012) The development of statutory and non-statutory advice and guidance that addresses concerns, is helpful and does not exacerbate problems for children, parents and teachers/schools is crucial (Code of Practice Mk3)

The Front Line… ‘To transfer power to professionals on the front line and to communities we will: strip away unnecessary bureaucracy so that professionals can innovate and use their judgement; establish a clearer system so that professionals from different services and the voluntary and community sector can work together; and give parents and communities much more influence over local services’. Support and Aspiration (2011, p.5, para 7)

Specialist Provision: a positive & preferred choice Enhanced role (teaching and training providers) - new models to meet demand (resourced mainstream, academies, free schools) based on expertise and specialist knowledge Integrity of provision valued (i.e. not having to be linked to outreach activity) Greater autonomy to innovate and pioneer new education pathways and curricula Better continuity of provision (e.g. school > college; local > regional) SENCo role?

Support Services Cinderella is not invited to the ball even though she is wanted (Ellis et al, 2012; NUT 2012) Struggling to manage budget cuts at a time when they are needed (Gross, 2011; NUT 2012) (valued ‘front line services’?) Need to trade services in a system that is ‘opened up’ to include independent providers (a service may have been privatised), special schools (including academies and free schools) Need to work in competition with other services a school may wish to buy, for example educational psychology and advisory services including those run by voluntary and community sector organisations

A framework for outreach, in-reach & support In addition to any frameworks already in use it might be worth reviewing and adapting Quality Standards for SEN Support and Outreach Services (DCSF, 2008) The Quality Standards cover 16 dimensions of support and outreach organised under 2 headings: outcomes standards service management and delivery standards The standards are designed to be used as suggested markers against which services provided can be evaluated

The SENCo may … want to consider whether their school or setting has sufficient access to services want to identify how service support and guidance has contributed to improved outcomes, or how they think it might do so in the future wish to reflect on the nature of support, whether they think is sufficient, and how it impacts on individual learners  challenge and support services to work in ways that they consider to be most effective in classroom contexts wish to contribute to discussions about how to disseminate advice to teachers and teaching assistants and to collate feedback for services on collaborative support practice wish to be included in a self-evaluation feedback cycle and to share their views on specific aspects of it have important things to say about capacity building and how this needs to be balanced against work overload and the over delegation of responsibilities.

Ofsted and Inspections Half-day notice now ‘settled on’ Clear focus on ‘age’ and ‘starting point’ re: progress of groups (Especially SEND) Looking for ‘rapid’ and ‘sustained’ progression Still place of specific ‘stories’ and ‘case studies’ Cannot be ‘outstanding’ without teaching being judged so; a new limiting factor

The Future of Inclusive Support

Enhanced Special Provision Is outward looking (connected to mainstream and the work of SENCos). Offers in-reach for pupils and staff from partner schools. Maintains its ‘integrity’ (with clear core and support service roles). Supports the professional development of its own staff, with a particular emphasis on enhancing skills to support colleagues in mainstream schools. Is reflective and self-critical with regard to both provision and pedagogy, recognising the importance of academic and broader educational outcomes.

Enhanced inclusive support Takes account of the preferences of parents, children and young people and values the time involved in partnership Recognises the role that schools and SENCos play in determining the use of support (and the strengths and weaknesses of this) Recognises that aspects of support to learners, provided by teaching assistants should focus on outcomes Maintains its ‘integrity’ (with clear core and support service roles) and operates within an appropriate service framework that is evaluative Supports the professional development of its own staff, with a particular emphasis on enhancing skills to support colleagues in schools and other settings. Involves working with a range of professionals/organisations

Timescale for change Summer Spring Spring 2012 2013 2014 Introduce Bill to Parliament Consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny period Royal Assent and implementation Draft Bill Published Summer Spring Spring 2012 2013 2014

15 May 2012 September 2014 (1) Expect to be working with a new slimmed down SEN or SEND Code of Practice that contains essential advice the professionals need and reflects changes to the law, including statutory advice on inclusive schooling Expect to be using a single assessment framework and Education and Health Care Plans (not Statements) Expect to play a role in the use of personal budgets and direct payments Expect to be working with a clear ‘local offer’ that you are part of and will be using to access services and support 15 May 2012

15 May 2012 September 2014 (2) Expect to be working with more parents as ‘decision-makers’ with regard to choosing the ‘right’ school for their child as a ‘right’ Expect to be using a new single school category of SEN or SEND (Who’s in/out ????) Expect to be developing more effective ways of working with children experiencing behavioural, emotional, social and mental health difficulties Expect to be using effective interventions and approaches to implement these that work for you (matching provision to needs) 15 May 2012

15 May 2012 September 2014 (3) Expect – with time and leadership support – to innovate (teaching and curriculum provision) Expect to be taking a lead in providing, facilitating and choosing training in a more open market Expect to play a key role in accessing external advice and support from a range of providers Expect to know how funding models operate and how funds are used (without clear ring-fencing) Expect to have to build, rebuild and sustain SENCo networks Expect to clarify – with governors and school leaders the scope of the SENCo role .... 15 May 2012

Questions… Watch this space… However consultations and ‘trials’ go … change is ahead … Much of which is very uncertain … … and complex … Questions… Christopher Robertson and Gareth D Morewood 2nd July 2012

Whatever happens … enjoy the