1 / 44

The challenge of making Birmingham’s SEND provision the best it can be

The challenge of making Birmingham’s SEND provision the best it can be. Geoff Lindsay, CEDAR, University of Warwick Birmingham Educational Partnership Annual Conference 22.09.17. Max Miller dilemma. Plan A – National statistics M y own research Inclusion Commission

jamesperez
Download Presentation

The challenge of making Birmingham’s SEND provision the best it can be

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The challenge of making Birmingham’s SEND provision the best it can be Geoff Lindsay, CEDAR, University of Warwick Birmingham Educational Partnership Annual Conference 22.09.17

  2. Max Miller dilemma • Plan A – • National statistics • My own research • Inclusion Commission • Making Birmingham’s SEND provision the best it can be • Plan B • Challenges • Way forward? Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  3. Some factors relevant to getting the best possible SEND provision • History of SEND • Legislation • Pre-1981 Act to 2014 Act • Disability to need focus • Segregation to inclusion • Parents • National • Financial: eg austerity; 1981 Act was ‘unfunded’, • ‘position’ of SEND, eg political/financial priority • Eg Bercow review for SLCN, 2014 Act Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  4. Local • History: financial, social conscience for SEND • Austerity again • Political priorities: of education, of SEND • Politics/philosophy • Education • SEND • Organisation • Schools and assets, central and other services, academies, free schools, independent… • Flexibility Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  5. Issues regarding SEND • Huge variation between LAs, and schools eg • Pupils with SEND, appeals • Socioeconomic disadvantage • But also local policies/practices (histories etc) • Level of special provision • Conceptualisation of SEND • Disability v need? • Provision: inclusion v segregation • Different models challenge this • Support services: admin (eg SENAR), ‘practitioners’ (eg ed psych) and others. • Financial delegation Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  6. Collaboration • Education, health and social care • History? • Priority? • Legal, financial • Conceptual • Language differences, assessment differences • Practice variations Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  7. Some data • Variation • Over time • Between LAs, eg appeals • Gender, socioeconomic disadvantage, EAL, ethnicity • Intersectionality • Inter-relationships Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  8. % pupils with SEN 2007-16 Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  9. SEND national trends over time • Statements/EHC plans: • 2007-2017 stable around 2.8% • vs Birmingham: 3.6% dropping to 3.3% (2010) then stable around 3.3-3-1% to 2017, 3.2% in 2017 • Steady drop in SEN without statement or EHCP from 2010 =- 2016, slight rise to 2017 but still 14.4% Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  10. National statistics 2017 • Gender - Boys higher for • Statement/EHCP: 4.0% v 1.6% • School support: 14.6% vs 8.1% • FSME- higher % of pupils with SEN • 26.6% vs 11.8% • English as 1st language – higher % having statement or EHCP • 2.9% vs 2.3% Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  11. National statistics (cont.) • SEN primary need, eg • ASD: 31.1% boys, 15.7% girls had statement/EHCP • SLD: 11.5% vs 16.7% • Ethnicity –with a statement of EHCP (2.8% national), eg • Highest: 4.4% travellers of highest heritage, 4.0 % black Caribbean • Lowest: 1.8% Indian • Major differences in prevalence of some SEN by ethnicity • Eg pupils of Pakistani heritage: higher odds for hearing impairment but lower odds for ASD compared with white British, after taking account of other factors including socioeconomic disadvantage (Strand & Lindsay, 2009) • Intersectionality • Age by primary need, eg • 62.3% 3 year olds with SEN had SLCN but only 13.7% of 15 year olds Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  12. % children with SLCN or ASD by year group(Lindsay & Strand, 2016) Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  13. Relationships between key LA decisions and appeals (109 LAs) • 69% of requests for EHC needs assessments were agreed – 31% refused • 95% of assessments led to an EHC plan being written • 94% of EHC plans were accepted without appeal Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  14. 10 9 Rate of appeals per 10,000 school population: variation by LAs (Cullen, Lindsay et al., 2017) 8 7 Percentage of all cases 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 LA Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  15. Appeal outcomes • 81% of appeals resulted in a withdrawal or conceded decision • 64% of decisions of the Tribunal in favour of the appellant vs 36% in favour of the LA • Overall only 7% of appeals resulted in favour of the LA Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  16. Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  17. Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  18. Changing the SEND system? Tanker? Flotilla? Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  19. Making Birmingham’s SEND provision the best?? • Inclusion Commission – consultation • Very high support for the Vision (97%), Mission (93%), Objectives (78-91%0, and Priorities (79-84) BUT • Issues of trust, confidence Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  20. How? • Collective values • Positive relationships • Collaborative action • Assess, plan, do, review cycle • Tanker or flotilla? Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  21. Additional slides Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  22. Overview • Background • National picture for SEND • Disagreement resolution • Inclusion commission • Overview • Consultation • Way forward? Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  23. Prevalence of ASD across year groups (Stand & Lindsay, 2012) Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  24. Prevalence of children with SLCN across year groups( Lindsay & Strand, 2016) Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  25. Disagreement resolution -aims • DfE funded study 2014-2017 (Cullen, Lindsay et al., 2017) • Review of implementation of requirements of the Children and Families Act 2014 • Overall aim : • To assess how well new and existing routes for redress were working for children, young people and their families. • Data from 109 LAs, 42 LAs at all three time points Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  26. Relationships between key LA decisions and appeals (109 LAs) • Of 40,952 decisionsmade across 109 LA regardingrequests for EHC needs assessments: • 7% of refused requests for assessment resulted in an appeal (n = 873) • 12% of assessments that resulted in a refusal to issue an EHC plan were appealed (n = 168) • 6% of EHC plans (any aspect of the content) were appealed (n = 1528) • So: • largest proportionof appeals: refusal to issue an EHC plan; • largest numberof appeals: contentof the plan Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  27. Mediation • Will mediation assist in the process of facilitating agreement between parents (and children and young people) and the LA? • Between year 1 and year 2 there was a significant increase in the proportion of mediations • And in reduction in appeals to the Tribunal Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  28. 100 Mediation take up Y1 and Y2 90 80 70 60 % Year 1 50 40 Year 2 30 20 10 0 chose to take up mediation chose not to take up mediation Base: 42 LAs (responded to all 3 surveys) Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  29. 100 Mediation outcome Y1 and Y2 90 80 70 60 % 50 40 30 20 10 0 mediation is continuing resolution without appeal to registered Tribunal appeal Tribunal Year 1 Year 2 Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  30. All appeals Appeal outcomes N1 = 2569 Decided Pending N1.2 = 1810 N1.1 = 759 Withdrawn/ Decided by Conceded Tribunal Panel N1.1.1 = 616 N1.1.2 = 143 81 % of N 1.1 Decided in LA decision favour of upheld appellant N1.1.2.1 = 51 N1.1.2.2 = 92 7 % of N1.1 12 % of N1 .1 Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  31. Birmingham Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  32. Main findings • LA practices regarding SEND disagreement resolution varied widely, eg % appeals • Great majorityof key appealable EHC plan decisions not appealed by parents or young people. • Mediationreduced the likelihood of disagreements escalating to an appeal • and cost-effective route for disagreement resolution • Good Practice Guide has been drafted: Mairi Ann Cullen, Preventing and resolving SEND disagreements. London: DfE Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  33. Inclusion Commission • Concern within Birmingham re the operation of the SEND system, including • Processes • Expenditure – high, but cost effective? • Numbers of pupils out of city and those in independent provision (overlapping) • Numbers of appeals • Use of the SEND provision in the city • But appreciation of positive aspects/qualities • Political and professional commitment to address the issues Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  34. Inclusion commission: process • Creation of IC with wide range of stakeholders (>20) • Senior, expert, broad representation incl. councillors, LA officers, parents, organisations, young person • Time and task limited • GL as independent chair • Consultants (SEND4Change) previously appointed • 6 work streams with high engagement of stakeholders • IC initially discussed and considered key issues, range of evidence eg statistics, and their own experience and views on the issues and ways forward • High level of commitment across the IC with, of course, varieties of views on specific issues Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  35. Vision “Every child and young person aged 0-25 with a special educational need and/or disability (SEND) in Birmingham will have the opportunity to be happy, healthy and achieve their fullest potential, enabling them to participate in, and contribute to all aspects of life.” Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  36. Key issues • Recognition of the challenge • High commitment to addressing positively. • Values driven plus evidence based where possible and pragmatic • Leadership, support from the top Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  37. Consultation results Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  38. Key findings • People consulted agreed on the whole with the direction of travel of the vision, mission, objectives and priorities. • However, there was a lack of confidence that professionals could deliver the strategy within current resources. While in agreement about the need to work together, there was a lack of belief that organisations could genuinely work in partnership, and that all services are overstretched. • There was a perception that the strategy is focussed on reducing EHCPs and saving money rather than a focussing on the needs of the child. • The strategy needs to be clearer about the application of the law – including disability discrimination. Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  39. Which means • There was support for the ideas, intentions and plans But • Concern/doubt/lack of trust. So • Way forward?? Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  40. Methods Quantitative • 3 online surveys to all 152 higher tier and unitary English LAs, each covering two terms of the academic years, 1 September 2014 to 31 August 2016. • 109 LAs (72%) responded to at least one of these surveys. • to analyse patterns based on individual cases going through the system. • 42 LAs (28%) responded to all three surveys • to analyse patterns of disagreement resolution over time, from Year 1 (2014-15) to Year 2 (2015-16). • Two annual online surveys to LA lead officers for EHC needs assessment processes • 60, 62 responses respectively Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  41. Parents interviewed had three main concerns about SEND complaints processes: • when the complaint was ignored or not taken seriously • when the response to the complaint took too long to emerge • when the response did not help to put right the issue/s complained about Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  42. Agreement with objectives Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  43. Agreement with objectives Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

  44. Agreement with priorities Birmingham Educational Partnership 22..09.17

More Related