Given the lack of accountability within the current SEND system and the omission of any proposals for robust accountability measures in the SEND and AP Green Paper, it is a relief to see that Ofsted and CQC are planning to up their game.
Explicitly identifying in inspection reports weaknesses or systemic issues that local areas must address can only be a good thing. Requiring local areas to update and publish their strategic plans to clearly state the remedial actions they will be taking, along with monitoring visits for weaker local areas, should help tackle the inertia that has characterised the response to a poor inspection outcome in many local areas. Assigning grades to local areas will give stakeholders an at-a-glance indicator of their performance and hopefully will incentivise better performance – although we’d prefer to see four grades rather than three.
We are pleased to see the inspectorates increasing their focus on the impact of local SEND arrangements on children and young people – that’s what it’s all about, after all. The concerted effort to hear their voices within the inspection process is also welcome.
We are concerned, however, that in shifting attention to impact, there is a risk that it will be even easier for local areas to get away with breaking the law. A move away from statutory requirements in the inspection process would be logical if local areas were generally compliant and needing to move beyond standard practice to achieving excellence, but sadly that is not yet case. As it stands, these inspections are pretty much the only means by which local areas are held to account in relation to meeting statutory requirements. That’s why we are asking Ofsted and CQC to strengthen its focus on compliance while at the same time extending their lines of enquiry to consider the impact of a local area’s SEND arrangements on its children and young people.
Ofsted and CQC can only be expected to play a part in holding local areas to account, however. Their remit does not allow them to go beyond further monitoring or inspection activity as a response to poor performance. Government itself needs to step in and introduce penalties for local areas who fail to turn around provision in a timely fashion following a poor inspection outcome. Otherwise, local areas are free to continue to offer poor services with impunity.
Read Natspec’s full response to the consultation.