Over the coming months, a number of test areas across the country will be trialling some of the key changes set out in the government’s SEND and AP Improvement Plan. Alongside other reforms, each local area participating in this ‘change programme’ will be tasked with establishing a ‘SEND and AP partnership’ which will be responsible for developing and implementing a ‘local area inclusion plan’ or LAIP. The Department for Education (DfE) is currently busy working on guidance, benchmarking tools and templates to help set the course for these change programme areas.
Much of the focus of the SEND and AP Improvement Plan is on sorting out issues affecting children aged 5–16 and schools, so there was always a substantial risk that young people and further education would have only a walk-on part in this critical testing phase. That’s why Natspec, along with the Association of Colleges (AoC) and other FE and skills stakeholders, have been lobbying hard to ensure that the DfE’s guidance for the change programme participants requires them to pay due attention to the needs of 16–25 year olds when planning local (and regional) SEND provision. We’ve proposed that the DfE requires all local areas to have an FE and Skills provider sub-group, the chair of which should be on the SEND and AP partnership board to ensure post-school providers are represented at this top decision-making level. We’ve also suggested that at least one strategic objective with an explicit focus on 16–25 provision is included in every LAIP.
Planning and commissioning post-16 provision for young people with SEND is a relatively new responsibility for local authorities. It is not surprising, therefore, that many feel less confident about it than they do in ensuring the needs of school-aged children are being met. That’s why we have also offered to help the participating SEND and AP partnerships to review and plan improvements to their 16–25 provision. We want to be critical friends supporting them in the ambitious work that they are taking on – not critics watching on and sniping from the sidelines.
Clearly we do not have the capacity to act as advisor to each and every one of the 31 local areas involved in the change programme. Instead, we are focusing on providing them with tools and resources to help them familiarise themselves with the FE providers and provision in their area (and in neighbouring areas), make informed judgements about its sufficiency and quality, and plan for improvements so that they are better able to meet the needs of current and future 16–25 year olds.
Our first offer will be a set of prompt questions to help change programme areas to develop a sound understanding of their current offer. This will then act as a baseline from which they can build. It will be a challenging piece of work – and one which will undoubtedly benefit from the participation of all the different stakeholders with an interest in 16–25 provision in the local area or sub-region. So, whether you’re a local authority official in the SEND team or within adult services, a health official, chair of a parent/carer network, specialist FE college principal, or SEND leader in a mainstream FE setting, we would encourage you to work together to find the answers to the questions we’re posing. And to think about what others you could be asking in order to create a comprehensive picture of your 16–25 provision and identify where improvements are needed.
The change programme is an important opportunity to test out how the government’s SEND and AP Improvement Plan can be made to deliver for 16–25 year olds – and what further actions that go beyond this schools-driven agenda may be necessary. It is absolutely vital that the DfE sets high expectations of the change programme areas in terms of their inclusion of children and young people of all ages and provision at all stages of the 0–25 SEND system in this test phase. It is equally important that the local areas embrace this opportunity to make a positive difference for young people with SEND. Natspec will do all it can to support them in this endeavour. We are calling on everyone with an interest in improving 16–25 provision in their local area to do the same.
Here are a few questions that you could start to chew over.
Questions to help you understand current supply and demand, predict future demand and identify any gaps
- How well do we know the full range of post-16 providers in our local area and in our (sub-) region and the distinctive nature of their offer? For example, what types of course they offer (e.g. supported apprenticeships, supported internships, study programmes to build independence), which needs they can meet or where they have particular strengths or specialisms? Are there provider or provision types with which we are less familiar? If so, how might we further your knowledge of post-16 providers and provision?
- How well prepared are we in terms of capacity to meet future need post-16 in the short and medium term, based on our demographic analysis of 11–16 year olds and their needs, and our understanding of current post-16 provision? If there is a mis-match, do we have strategic plans in place to address any gaps? In reaching conclusions, have we considered supporting growth within existing local providers, (greater) use of regional commissioning, as well as opening new provision?
- To what extent do discussions about post-16 options/emerging preferences of young people and their families in annual reviews from Year 9 onwards influence our provision planning and commissioning?
- How close to the national average of ~10% of EHCP holders in FE being educated in specialist – rather than mainstream – FE is our local area? What is the reason for any significant variance?
Questions to help you analyse any disparity in pre- and post-16 spending on SEND provision
- To what extent does the proportion of our high needs budget spent on 16–25-year-olds match the proportion of EHCPs held by young people in this age group? If there is a big disparity, why is that?
- What proportion of local authority-funded/commissioned support services (e.g. speech and language or behaviour support) that are available to children and schools are also available to 16–25 year olds and colleges? If there is a significant variance, why is that?
Questions to help you explore the young people’s experience of the system
- What proportion of cases that go to first tier tribunal relate to 16–25 year olds? What are the recurring issues and how might we address these?
- What are the most common concerns or areas of dissatisfaction identified by young people or parents/carers of 16–25 year olds? Why is the case and how could we improve satisfaction levels?
- What proportion of post-school placements are agreed by the March 31 statutory deadline? What are the barriers to meeting this deadline? Are there any common factors, e.g. types of need or young person / family circumstance, in cases where the deadline is not met? How could these be addressed?
Questions on what happens after young people leave the 0-25 SEND system
- How well do we understand the provision / support in our local area that will be available for young people after they leave full-time education (e.g. support to gain and retain employment; supported housing; adult learning opportunities)? Are we effectively signposting young people and families to and helping them make contact with existing provision? Do we have strong working relationships with key transition partners? If post-school / college opportunities are limited, how could we influence the development of additional provision?
- How is the local area evaluating the longer-term impact of its SEND provision and services on the lives of young people? How long do we track young people for after they leave the ‘SEND system’, e.g. after an EHC plan is ceased. What metrics are we using to measure impact?
