Local Area Networking for SEN. Review of Access and Inclusion Services March 2006. Over 300 staff are employed in these services: Student Support Service Educational Psychology Service Special Educational Needs Assessment Specialist Teaching Service Access and Welfare
Review of Access and Inclusion 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.Review of Access and Inclusion Services: Summary
· 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.
Cabinet approval for process:*
Cabinet approval for second stage: to be decided
*Appointment of consultant(s) to manage the process is crucial
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
Student Support Service including Primary PRU, Secondary PRUs, Directions Team, Looked after Children’s 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
Leicester Royal Infirmary ServicesLocal Area Working: Rationale
In many cases practitioners are already delivering these functions. We now want to ensure that they are embedded across the children’s 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.
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.
· Felt they had supported schools in practical ways.
· 2 felt they didn’t 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.
· 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 reportLead SENCOs
Key elements: 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.
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 specificationOverall Shape of New Services
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
Fits area special school model
Local responsiveness to need
Strong political support for the programme
Approach called for by OFSTED (2005)
Will advice be independent?
Changes professional team relations: new shared identity as area team on top of professional identityModel: Commissioned Service from Area Special Schools
Problems service to mainstream schools in the area.
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.
No single point of contact for referrals within or outside Children’s 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.
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 countyService Model : Commissioned Service from Area Special Schools- detail
Challenges service to mainstream schools in the area.
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
Involvement of parents
Long term absence in small teams
Match to children’s centres and social care
Equality of provision
Need for speedy operation of panels
First phase to include audit and equality impact assessment
Some teams could be mainstream based
Better engagement of voluntary sector- using services smarter
Why not focus on communities rather than schools
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 workManagers Meeting: 16/3/06
Redbridge service to mainstream schools in the area.
Longstanding Children’s Trust A/D Colin Moor 020 8708 3056
Good workforce remodelling, totally integrated EY service. Helen Norris Head of EY and Play 020 8464 3333
Generally very well organised LA. Francis James
Good SEF with integrated SEN. Ingrid ?
Special Schl hub and spokes model with health. A/D Mike Golding 019 1533 1000
4 locality based teams, including EPs
Great enthusiasm for change. A/D Steve Colwill
Good strategy for children’s centres and extended schools. Rita SylvesterOther LAs to Visit
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 leadFurther Work
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