Return
to Agenda
ITEM CA8
CABINET
– 18 JULY 2006
POST 16
PROVISION FOR STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS
Report by
Director for Children, Young People & Families
Background
- Oxfordshire is
unique in that none of its special schools caters for pupils beyond
the age of 16. In the 1980s a decision was taken by the County Council
to create its post 16 provision for Special Educational Needs (SEN)
in what were then the LEA’s colleges of further education. The rationale
was that these colleges had expertise in helping "non academic" pupils
make the transition into adult life and were better placed to meet the
needs of this group than 12 relatively small special schools. Upon incorporation
in 1993 the capital and revenue budgets for this provision transferred
to the Further Education Funding Council (FEFC), which has, subsequently,
been replaced by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC).
- This arrangement
may have been appropriate at the time but in recent years the colleges
have not felt able to meet the needs of all pupils who have to leave
special schools. This, and a lack of confidence in college provision,
has led parents (many represented by CHOICE, a parent group) to ask
the Council to offer continuation in special school as an option. It
has also led to a small, but significant, number of students having
to be placed outside Oxfordshire, often at great expense to the County
Council. While Oxfordshire is 14th lowest user of out-county
places in England overall, its post 16 usage is twice the national average.
- Parents also express
their concern that in most authorities post 16 pupils with severe learning
difficulties remain in special schools until the age of 18 or 19 and
then transfer to college for a further period of education. (See Annex
1 for pattern of post 16 special school provision
in similar authorities).
Funding
- The current funding
mechanism for post 16 students with Statements of SEN (including out
county placements and mainstream schools) is through a historically
based block grant from the Department for Education and Skills (DfES)
that is transferred to the Council through the LSC. This grant is a
little more than £500k p.a. whereas the Council’s expenditure on this
group is in excess of £1.5million p.a. Ironically, despite this relative
"overspending" by the Council, many parents remain dissatisfied.
- Colleges are allocated
funding for each student and, in addition, have a recently capped block
of funding for "additional learning support" (ALS) which is used to
meet the additional needs of students with a wide range of Learning
Difficulties and Disabilities (LDD). Because this sum is limited the
colleges do not meet the needs of all students transferring from special
schools. Perhaps this is not surprising as the money they receive from
the LSC for ALS is very similar to that received by colleges in other
authorities (about 8% of total funding - see Annex
2 for details), yet there is no expectation
elsewhere, as there is in Oxfordshire, that colleges effectively provide
post 16 special schools within their campuses.
- When a student
leaves school or goes to college his/her Statement of SEN lapses. However,
responsibility for students with Statements of SEN remains with the
County Council. When an appropriate local or specialist college place
is not available, placement in an out of county special school is usually
required as, unfortunately, there is no in-county provision for this
group. This solution is expensive, not inclusive and not what most parents
want for their children.
- There is currently
significant expenditure by both the Local Authority and LSC on out-county
post 16 SEN provision. The LSC spends £1.272m p.a. on specialist FE
college placements and the Council spends £370,000 p.a. on new placements
at 16 in out-county special schools. Although there will always be some
young people who need out-county placements post 16, if post 16 special
school provision were made within the county, numbers requiring out
county provision would reduce.
- Although there
is to be a national review of funding for 16-19 SEN in 2008/09 there
is no indication that Oxfordshire will gain from this. Indeed, a recent
LSC report on funding of post 16 SEN provision (Through Inclusion
to Excellence) suggests that government should consider a significantly
smaller contribution being made by the LSC for students’ health and
care support. This would have a potentially detrimental effect on the
Council’s resources.
- DfES and LSC officials
have indicated that even if the Council were to open sixth forms in
its special schools it is almost certain that no revenue funding from
DfES/LSC would follow, at least under the current funding regime. It
is possible that some capital funding might be made available and officers
are pursuing this through contacts at the DfES and LSC. It is also possible
that some of the funding currently used by the Council and LSC for post
16 out-county placements could be used to contribute to the cost of
in-county provision.
Inter-agency
work
- To address the
concerns shared by parents, schools, colleges and officers a working
group was set up, chaired jointly by officers of the LSC and County
Council and involving representatives of CHOICE, the Connexions Service,
colleges and special schools. Consultants have been employed by the
LSC to assist in the exploration of ways forward and the national LSC
and DfES have been consulted.
- CHOICE has sought
parental views through a questionnaire. CHOICE recognises that this
was a limited exercise and that wider consultation would be needed before
firm proposals for change could be made. Feedback from CHOICE indicates
that the great majority of parents who responded wanted special school
provision as an option.
- The working group
has explored a range of issues and some possible solutions but recognises
that the history of Oxfordshire means it will not be easy, or without
cost, to create a system that reflects good practice elsewhere. As one
group member put it "I wish we weren’t starting from here". Nevertheless,
the group has helped to develop a shared vision of what might be possible
and expressed this through work on a new curriculum framework.
Vision
for Post 16 SEN provision
- The group has
proposed a new vision for post 16 SEN provision in Oxfordshire based
on:
- the development
of a curriculum framework for young people with SEN aged 16-22 years;
- the development
of a broader range of post 16 SEN provision, in special schools and
colleges, to deliver this curriculum framework;
- a flexible approach
to meeting needs with young people progressing through the steps of
the curriculum framework, in either a school or college setting, as
appropriate, to meet their needs and developmental stage.
A
draft curriculum framework has been produced as a basis for further
development and consultation.
Options
- The group has
explored a range of options for change in order to achieve the vision
outlined above. Each has advantages and disadvantages, some of which
are explored below.
Option
1 – Strengthen existing arrangements
- With improved
liaison between schools, parents, students and colleges, and with further
improvements in college provision, currently underway, it might be possible
to sustain the existing system of college based 16-19 provision. One
significant advantage of this is that colleges can offer adult orientated
provision in institutions large enough to create viable groups and curriculum
flexibility. It would preserve existing college provision and staff
within existing or planned buildings. The disadvantages include the
need to build parental and school confidence in college provision and
the need for colleges/the LSC to invest additional resources so that
all students can leave special school assured of a high quality post
16 provision. This option does not deliver the vision symbolised by
the draft curriculum framework and is unlikely to satisfy parents or
prevent all further out county placements. There would, however, be
no funding implications for the County Council.
Option
2 – College Funded Provision in Special Schools
- It would be possible
for colleges to use their resources to purchase places in special schools
for some individual students transferring onto their rolls. This has
happened already to a very limited extent and for a few students this
might be possible. The advantages of this arrangement include the ability
to identify students whose needs would be hard to meet in college and
to keep them in a school environment until they are ready to transfer.
Such "franchising" arrangements cannot be used to change the nature
of the school so that all students effectively "stay on" and might be
criticised by OFSTED on the grounds of the school not offering a peer
group and a coherent 16 –19 curriculum.
- This option would
need to have the support of schools and colleges to make it work. Parents
would be concerned that such arrangements would be available to only
a few students and that the safeguards offered by a Statement of SEN
would be lost.
- A variation on
this option is for colleges to provide staff to teach/support their
students but on school sites. It is by no means certain that this would
find favour with college or school staff and it would not satisfy all
parents. Nevertheless it could allow students to transfer to courses
at college when appropriate and not just at 16. This option represents
probably only an interim step towards a longer-term solution.
- This option would
require limited additional funding from either the LSC/colleges or from
schools/the County Council to ensure that effective provision is made
for a few students.
Option3
– Extend the Age Range of Some Special Schools
- The preferred
solution for many parents would be to offer post 16 special school education.
This would allow young people to transfer to college courses at 19,
or before if that were appropriate to their needs and development. Some
students would leave education altogether at 16, as they do now. Having
extended age ranges in some schools would reflect practice in other
authorities (see Annex 1) and would improve choice for parents. The
curriculum framework discussed above would help facilitate this more
flexible approach to post 16 education.
- Concentrating
post 16 provision in a small number of schools would make best use of
existing school buildings and facilitate the creation of larger groups.
This would be particularly important if some students continued to transfer
to college, so leaving very small numbers staying on in particular schools.
- Consideration
would need to be given to which schools or types of school would offer
an extended age range and to what age. It might be that certain types
of provision e.g. courses for students with moderate learning difficulties
and behavioural, emotional and social difficulties, could continue to
be provided in colleges rather than by extending the age range in particular
special schools.
- A disadvantage
of extending school provision might be that colleges face reductions
in student numbers leading to staff losses. It could result in a continued
lack of choice, but this time because some college courses ceased. This
option might not be popular with all parents or schools where the age
range is not extended and could be seen as inequitable.
- It is difficult
to estimate the cost to the Council of any extension of school age ranges,
as this would depend on the numbers of pupils in school each year. If,
for example, all students with Severe Learning Difficulties (SLD) stayed
on in the first year this would cost around £450k. Such a figure would
grow for three years as subsequent students stayed on. If more students
stayed on roll the costs would rise proportionately. There would also
be a significant but unquantified capital cost, though this might possibly
be borne by the LSC.
Further
Work
- Further work is
needed to refine the curriculum framework in collaboration with special
school headteachers and college principals. This is scheduled for September
2007. Better estimates on revenue costs and how they might be phased
are likely to result from a more detailed work being done with headteachers
assessing the needs of young people in relation to the curriculum framework
to determine potential staying on rates. Capital costs and sources of
funding to meet these require investigation and this is in hand. Parental
views also need further exploration.
- A pilot project
is being developed between colleges and two special schools to develop
provision funded by colleges on special school sites for one or two
pupils in September 2007.
RECOMMENDATIONS
- The Cabinet
is RECOMMENDED, subject to consideration of any advice from the Children’s
Services Scrutiny Committee (which is expected to consider a draft of
this report on 11 July 2006), to:
- consider
which option or options set out in paragraphs 15 – 24 of the
report should be the subject of further work, including the
assessment of resource implications and consultation with parents;
- consider
how the funding implications of any changes might be addressed
in future budget plans for 2007/08 onwards;
- ask
officers to undertake further work to determine the number of
students who might be on each of the steps of the curriculum
framework, to assist the authority to determine the number of
young people likely to need to stay on in special schools if
this provision were available.
KEITH
BARTLEY
Director for
Children, Young People & Families
Background Papers: Through Inclusion to Excellence: The Report
of the Steering Group for the Strategic Review of the LSC’s Planning and
Funding of Provision for Learners with Learning Difficulties and/or Disabilities
across the Post-16 Learning and Skills Sector. November 2005
Contact
Officer: Simon Adams, Assistant Head of Service, Children & Young
People. Tel:
01865 810602
June
2006
Return to TOP
|