DBV in SEND | Insights

Summary of evidence supporting Tranche 2 interim findings: what have we understood through engagement with each stakeholder group and from analysis of the data?

1

Introduction •

The overall aim of the DBV programme is to support the efforts of local areas, within the current framework, to improve outcomes for children and young people with SEND, and ensure they can access the most appropriate support for their individual needs quickly and effectively, often through more effective and earlier support.

•

To make a lasting positive improvement to outcomes for children and young people with SEND, local areas need to work out the root causes of their challenges and identify opportunities to improve - this is done through a 'diagnostic', which is at the heart of Phase One of the DBV in SEND programme.

•

In addition to all of the existing intelligence gathered and engagement previously completed by Tranche 1 and Tranche 2 local areas, the DBV diagnostics have to date added evidence from many different stakeholders in the local SEND systems. This engagement was bespoke to each local area and was codesigned with each local area team.

•

The experience and views of these people has been added to nine million data points to create the interim DBV Phase One evidence base, and these numbers will increase upon completion of Tranche 3.

•

This pack provides some of the evidence at an aggregate level and at a single but anonymised Local Area level that has led to the interim findings outlined on the Insights page of the DBV in SEND website.

•

This pack is not intended to be a preliminary report, but rather it is intended to demonstrate the type of evidence gathered through the diagnostics to date.

2

The DBV Programme is gathering a unique and extensive data set covering a large portion of the national system, with input from all key stakeholder groups.

In addition to all the existing intelligence gathered and engagement completed by T1 and T2 local areas, the DBV diagnostics have added insight from:

800+ children and young people

1,200+ cases of children with SEND

5,000+ parent carers engaged

engaged directly through focus groups and surveys

analysed by local parents and practitioners to gather their perspectives on what changes would have positively impacted each child

through focus groups and surveys

2,300+ education providers

1,200+ practitioners and professionals

>9million data points

engaged through survey or focus groups

from across health, social care, education participated in case reviews, focus groups or workshops

analysed across service and financial data

… to build on the existing programmes of work already under way in local areas, seeking to improve support and outcomes for children and young people with SEND and improve LA financial positions.

Contents

1. Introduction to this pack of information 2. What children and young people said about the SEND support they receive 3. What parents and carers said about the SEND support their children and young people receive 4. How case review workshops identified opportunities to do things differently 5. What education providers said about SEND support provided to children and young people 6. Key findings from analysis of data about the provision of SEND support in selected local areas.

Children and young people

5

We heard from children with SEND about what they like and don’t like about school – examples are provided below.

He likes his teacher who helps him. This is him and the teacher

She likes getting the bus to school trips

She doesn’t like being chased in the playground

He doesn’t spend much time in class so he does other jobs. He likes these and especially collecting the post from the post box

He likes numbers

Jai

Charlotte

Charlotte, Year 3 • • •

Favourite animal: Cheetah and Koala Likes: Pick up time when I get to see my parents, school trips Dislikes: being chased around by another boy in the playground and waiting for lunch because I get hungry. I do have a banana at snack time

Jermaine

Jai, Reception

Jermaine, Year 3

•

• •

•

Likes: Numbers and phonics and PE. I like lunchtime and his apple.

Dislikes: There is nothing he doesn’t like

•

Jai had some challenges getting into the room with his walking support and reaching the big table.

Favourite animal: Rabbit Likes: Lunch. I have school dinners and it is always different. I like collecting the post with my teacher.

Dislikes: Indoor PE as I don’t like taking off my shoes and socks.

6

In one local area, 53% of children and young people with an EHCP agreed with the statement ‘my opinions matter’ in relation to planning their support.

Children and young people responses to a survey in one Local Area I can do things which I enjoy at school I feel safe in my community I am able to make decisions about my life I am active and involved in my community My voice is heard and my opinions matter I am cared for and have people who support me

I am hopeful and prepared for the future I am able to learn and enjoy being at school 0%

10%

Strongly agree

20%

agree

30%

40%

50%

neither agree nor disagree

disagree

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

strongly disagree

Of children and young people with an EHCP, only 53% felt their voice was heard and their opinions matter.

This was the lowest agreement rate to any of the questions.

Source data: CYP Survey run over May-June 2023 and received over 650+ responses in one local area

7

In one LA, children and young people with SEND most commonly reported that what would most improve their mainstream school experience was “Teachers understanding [my] needs better”.

What could be improved about your school?

Mainstream Schools “I’d like that teachers didn’t mark me down or put me down when I don’t understand something”

Teachers to understand needs better More support from teachers/TAs Support during afterschool clubs and activities Ability for other children to be inclusive

“I needed to be encouraged to be independent and socialise but no one helped me”

More information from school More breaks/freetime Easier access to corridors Level of Independence

“I didn’t feel that teachers really understood how my difficulties affect me”

More outside learning Physical Set up of Classroom Accessible Curriculum Materials 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Children and young people in mainstream schools in one local area reported that better support, better understanding of needs from school staff, and the ability of other children to be inclusive are what could most improve their education experience

8

Parents and carers

9

We heard various comments from parent carers on their experience of their child’s SEND support.

“It’s really important to start children’s learning structure and routine in nursery because by the time it gets to primary school, it's too late for them to learn this”

The previous school was very poor for SEND: there was no understanding or support and [my son] was just labelled as naughty when actually he was extremely anxious.

I'm unsure what will happen at secondary school and I'm very concerned that … he will slip through the net and get no support in secondary.

“I didn’t have any issues when my child was at nursery as it's very childfocused, fun and the child can be themselves”

“At nursery school, staff communicate with me and empower me to support my own children”

“Primary schools have loads more structure than nurseries, and children are expected to sit still and follow rules and this is really hard for children with ASD”

SEN at school seem to have no more understanding than standard teachers. A lot more training needed.

[The transition to secondary process] should not be made as stressful as it is now.

Do the support that parents and carers want for their child be accessed as ordinarily available support?

10

We heard some powerful, individual stories about the challenges some parent carers face in order to get their child’s needs met in a mainstream setting.

“My son has extreme sensory issues and it was really challenging for him in primary school – there were constant phone calls and timeouts and they told me if you don't do something with this child, he'll be in prison by the time he's 15. He really struggled with going into a secondary classroom and was kicking off all of the time or ignoring everyone and going mute.

I had to go into the school in his first week and explain he was actually having an internal meltdown when this was happening. The school listened to me and to him and got an educational psychologist in who said he is so unbelievably anxious he could only come to school for 10 minutes every day.

So in year 7 we started with 10 minutes and built it up to 30mins etc. They also worked with a special school in the area to introduce zones of regulation and I can't tell you how amazing that new approach was for him. Now in year eight, he goes in for most of the week and is really academic - he just won a history award for his year!

“My daughter was diagnosed with ASD when she was very young. She went to a mainstream school who had no idea how to support her. She was demonstrating bad behaviours and the school was frustrated because she wasn’t holding a pen so I went in and gave her an iPad keyboard and now she’s writing. She’s non-verbal and they had no idea what visuals were so I went in and gave them the day-to-day structure, the triggers and helped them understand how to adapt for my child.

Support in the classroom has to start with the absolute basics – there’s no structure for a teacher on how to help a child. All children are different and unless that teacher has worked with a child with that need before they won’t know what their world is like. The school has put a lot of good things in place for my daughter now but it’s all been very me-lead. How are they going to replicate that for the next child?

- Parent, shared in DBV Listening Forum

I’ve had the worst but I’ve also had the best and it’s in a mainstream school that listened to my child and took the time to understand what would work for him. They put him at the centre and now a child I was told would be in jail has his picture on the wall and is flying.”

- Parent, shared in DBV Listening Forum

11

Parents believed they needed an EHCP to access various support or services for their child.

What support or services do parents and carers believe their child can now access with an EHCP?

Additional 1:1 time in a classroom Staff at their school who are better skilled and trained to understand my child's needs Additional time from the Teacher Curriculum materials that have been adapted for my child Better communication from the school Access to specialist services/support A school that has the physical adaptations they need On-site medical support Access to therapies None On-site health/therapy support

LSA support in a classroom Nurture Group 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Number of Responses

Based on survey data, parents of children in mainstream schools feel that an EHCP enables their child to access more 1:1 time in a classroom and access to staff who are better skilled or trained to understanding their child’s needs (i.e. SENCOs, LSAs)

Source: Parent and Carer Survey data aggregated for 19/21 local authorities in Tranche 2. 1427 unique responses given to this question; respondents selected multiple responses.

12

Parent carers of children without an EHCP highlighted several differences between their experience and perceptions of mainstream early years education versus mainstream primary education.

We asked parents and carers of children and young people without an EHCP in early years and in primary school to rate the following statements (based on the EEF framework) on a scale from ‘strongly agree' to ‘strongly disagree'.

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

I believe that my child's school has the appropriate time & resource to meet their needs.

66%

My local authority understands my child's needs

69%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

80%

100%

26% 34%

I believe my child's education provider's Curriculum is adapted well for my child

78%

47%

My child's education provider communicates with me well and I understand what support they are receiving

77%

50%

I believe that my child is in the ideal (educational) setting to achieve their long term goals and ambitions

72%

47%

I believe my school's teachers and staff are well trained, to support children or young people with SEND

69%

45%

I know where to go to communicate my questions & concerns to my child's education provider and feel like my voice will be heard

74%

I believe my schools' physical space is well adapted for my child

79%

62%

My child’s school is welcoming and understands my childs needs

80%

65%

I believe the teaching at my child\’s school is delivered by highly skilled & qualified teachers

79%

Primary

60%

56%

73%

Early Years

Parents and carers whose children and young people do not have an EHCP in Primary settings find all aspects harder than in early years settings with the biggest difference in: • •

I believe my child’s school’s curriculum is well adapted for my child

I believe that my child’s school has the appropriate time and resource to meet my child’s needs

Source: Parent and Carer Survey data aggregated for 13/21 local authorities in Tranche 2. 379 unique responses given to this question

13

Parent carers of children with SEND but without an EHCP indicated their experiences of primary education were generally more positive than experiences of secondary education.

We asked parents and carers of children and young people on SEN support in mainstream secondary education to rate the following statements about their child’s primary and secondary journey, on a scale from ‘strongly agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’ -80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

I believe my school's teachers and staff are well trained, to support children or young people with SEND

45%

My child’s school is welcoming and understands my childs needs

0%

20%

38%

73%

62%

I believe my child's education provider's Curriculum is adapted well for my child

47%

My local authority understands my child's needs

28%

62%

I know where to go to communicate my questions & concerns to my child's education provider and feel like my voice will be heard

59%

56%

I believe that my child's school has the appropriate time & resource to meet their needs.

54% 26%

I believe that my child is in the ideal (educational) setting to achieve their long term goals and ambitions

Secondary

37%

34%

I believe my schools' physical space is well adapted for my child

80%

51% 50%

I believe the teaching at my child\’s school is delivered by highly skilled & qualified teachers

60%

28%

65%

My child's education provider communicates with me well and I understand what support they are receiving

40%

47%

24% 46%

Primary

Parents and carers whose children and young people do not have an EHCP find all aspects harder in secondary mainstream settings than in primary mainstream settings,, with the biggest differences perceived in: • •

I believe my child’s school’s is welcoming and understands my child’s needs

I believe that my school's teacher and staff are well trained to support children or young people with SEND

Source: Parent and Carer Survey data aggregated for 13/21 local authorities in Tranche 2. 110 unique responses given to this question

14

We heard many individual stories from parent carers about what support their child needs and the capability they would like to see more of in schools to meet that need.

“Teachers do not have enough training or understanding around ADHD. My son suffers as a result of this. He is treated like a 'naughty' child rather than a child who has a disability. I feel this is the case for many schools in the local area“

“My child’s teacher from September till March is not aware my child needs help with the possibility of dyslexia.

She answered she is not qualified to recognise this kind of issue”

15

Parents of children with SEND in special schools were asked why they thought their child needed a special school placement.

What were parents and carers reasons for their children starting in a special school?

What did parents and carers say needed to change in their child’s previous mainstream school for it to have been able to support their child successfully?

My child's previous mainstream school was not able to meet my child's needs

Additional 1:1 support for my child

Guidance from the Mainstream School

Teachers and staff better understanding my child’s needs

The mainstream school that was named as my child's next or future school would not be able to meet my…

Additional specialist support for my child

Guidance from the Local Authority e.g. SEN Service

Curriculum/Learning Materials adapted to become more…

A change in my child/young person's needs

Better communication from the school Other children being more inclusive towards my child

Guidance from Health e.g. NHS

Changes to the social spaces (e.g. playgrounds- cafeteria etc.)

Your own prior knowledge or experience of the SEND system Guidance from others (e.g. IASS- 'Full of Life'- or other charity)

Change to the physical classroom Changes to the access & corridors

Guidance from other Parents

On-site medical support available Transition at Secondary Changes to the shower and toilet facilities

(blank)

Staff suitably trained to meet the additional needs of my child Other More flexible school behaviour policies Excluded

0

0

100

200

300

100

200

300

Number of Responses

Number of Responses

Parents stated that there were three main factors that could improve their confidence in mainstream schools: more support (either 1:1 or from specialist staff), teachers and staff who had a better understanding of their child’s needs, and adapted curriculum materials.

Source: Parent and Carer surveys from 19/21 local authorities. 337 responses to first question shown.

16

In one local area, parents identified ‘bespoke training for specific needs’ as the most useful type of training that could be provided to improve SEND support.

What would be the most useful training for teaching staff to be provided with?

“Dyslexia and dyscalculia need experienced teachers who understand what is needed” “Staff should be specifically trained on masking in autistic girls as it is easy to say "they seem fine" but often this is not the case. ”

“Much more training needs to happen in schools on autism, including PDA and masking to help our children be better understood when they are left trailing behind and struggling in a mainstream.”

Getting a place for my child in a setting with staff that understand and have experience with issues such as autism has been almost impossible.

I feel all schools and children’s services staff should be more aware of how autistic girls may present differently to autistic boys.

Parents & carers voted that the most useful training teaching staff could be provided with would be bespoke training on needs and on general inclusive teaching practices

17

Parent carers of young people aged 16+ with an EHCP described the variability in experiences of transitioning to post 16 services.

Transitions have a decisive impact on young people’s lives, and we’re not always getting it right.

“

His journey into crisis started with transition.

It’s clearly stated everywhere that she doesn’t cope with change, but the changes kept coming.

The staff couldn’t meet need – they didn’t understand him and issued notice because they couldn’t cope with his behaviours.

He was put somewhere that couldn’t meet his needs.

They damaged him by saying they could support him when they clearly couldn’t. .

Transitions have often been parent-led with little support received either from LA or schools.

Experiences with social care are polarising, and parents recognise that workers need more support.

“

The social workers have both been fabulous.

“

There was no transition. I wasn’t even allowed to take him to visit - I did what I could, took photos for him.

We have a fantastic social worker.

It was entirely on me to research available options .

The LA did nothing for us in terms of transition – it was all on us.

I feel for the staff because I’m sure they were caring. It’s a hard job.

SEND should know him really well by now, but they’re making no plans.

We felt sorry for the social worker because she had no support.

He never had any careers advice even though I asked several times. .

I wasn't kept in the loop and didn’t get any info unless I chased it.

I hope that social worker has been sacked.

18

Parent carers of young people aged 16+ with an EHCP in one local area felt that they had not received any support to transition to their post-16 setting or prepare for adulthood.

What support did your child receive when transitioning into their post 16 setting?

What support has your child received in preparation for adulthood?

22% No support Some support

48%

No support

52%

Some support

78%

78% of parent/carers with young adults in post 16 settings reported that no support had been received for the transition from secondary to post 16 and more than half are still receiving no support in preparation for adulthood.

19

Analysis of child journeys

20

What is a case review and how are they used?

•

One of the aims of the DBV in SEND programme has been to identify the changes that would have the most positive impact on the delivery of services for children with SEND whilst supporting the local areas to work towards financial sustainability within the current legislative, policy and funding framework.

•

Case review workshops have been part of the wider evidence gathering process. They involve professionals from across a local SEND system with different backgrounds and experiences objectively reviewing real life cases.

•

The case review workshops aim to understand the ideal settings/support to achieve long-term outcomes, and to understand areas where local areas have been doing this well, and the root causes where there is an opportunity to do something differently.

•

Case reviewers included professionals and practitioners from across partners in a local area as well as many local parent carers.

21

Case reviews identified the availability of extra support and additional teacher/support time as the most common things that children with SEND need, and which should be more readily available as ordinarily available support.

What would the classroom and the wider environment need to look like for this/young child to receive the support they need through ordinarily available support?

140

120

Number of Cases

100 80 60 40 20 0 Teaching - Availability of extra support (e.g. TA)

Teaching - Teacher Support/time

Teaching - Availability of Teaching - Curriculum specialist support Materials

Wider Environment & Physical Environment - Physical Environment - Physical Environment Facilities - Ability for Social Spaces (inc.

Access & Corridors Physical Classroom other children to be playgrounds, cafeteria inclusive etc)

Wider Environment & Facilities - Toileting & Shower Facilities

Wider Environment & Facilities - On-site Medical Support

Professionals, practitioners and parent carers in case reviews identified that what needs to change/be available through ordinarily available support are exactly the same areas that parents believe they have access with an EHCP. So, if we could ensure this support/services were available for children and young people to access as ordinarily available support, we could meet the needs of children more efficiently.

Source: Case Review data for 743 cases across 21/21 local authorities.

22

The case reviews found that, for all children in mainstream settings with an EHCP, if the mainstream support had been in place, 44% would have been able to access the support they needed as ordinarily available support.

Could support have been accessed as ordinarily available support (if the mainstream support had been in place)?

Could Support Have Been Accessed through ordinarily available support?

EOTAS

8%

Independent or non-maintained special schools

92%

18%

Total

19%

Average EOTAS

8%

LA maintained special schools

Non maintained special schools or Independent

82%

33%

81%

92%

30%

18%

Resourced Provisions Units Maintained Special Schools or or SEN Special Academies

19%

81%

33%

Alternate Provision

64%

36%

Mainstream Schools or Academies Mainstream schools and academies

64% 43%

44%

Post 16

57%

56%

50%

Early Years Post-16

44%

0%

10%

50% 57%

20%

10%

20%

56%

30%

50%

Yes 0%

68%

67%

36%

Hospital Schools or Alternative Provision

Early Years

70%

82%

32%

Resourced Provision or SEN Units

67%

40%

60%

70%

60%

70%

50%

80%

90%

100%

No

30%

40% Yes

50%

43%

50%

80%

90%

100%

No

44% of children in mainstream could have accessed the support they needed as ordinarily available support (had the right resource and support been in place)

Source: Case Review data for 743 cases across 21/21 local authorities.

23

Case reviews found that if the right mainstream support had been available, 56% of children in special schools could have been supported in mainstream settings.

For children & young people in Special School provision, is this the most ideal provision for them?

30%

"If a child in a specialist school is not in the ideal provision for their needs, what setting could have been better for them, if mainstream support had been in place?

25%

56%

20% 15%

28%

26%

10%

44% 5%

1%

1%

0%

Alternate Provision

Other Education Outside Of A Setting

Mainstream With Nurture Base Rather Than Specialist

0% CYP is not in the ideal provision

Mainstream School And Resourced Provisions Academies Or Sen Units

CYP is in the ideal provision

Professionals identified in case reviews that 56% of children in a special school setting could be in a different provision that was more ideal for them. Of those, 28% could be in a mainstream school and a further 26% could be a Resourced Provision or SEN unit as their ideal setting.

Source: Case Review data aggregated for 19/21 local authorities, with this question answered in 354 individual cases.

24

Case reviews found that if the right mainstream support had been available, 50% of young people aged 16+ with an ECHP in a mainstream setting should have been able to access the required support through ordinarily available support.

Could Support Have Been Accessed through ordinarily available support?

Total

Mainstream Settings Post 16 Settings (e.g. FE college)

64%

36%

50%

50%

56%

44%

Independent Special Schools LA Maintained Special Schools

78% 63%

38%

Resource Provisions Alternative Provisions

22%

75%

25%

67%

33% 88%

EOTAS

No

13%

Yes

50% of children ages 16+ in mainstream setting could have accessed the support they needed as ordinarily available support (had the right resource and support been in place)

Source: Case Review data aggregated for 19/21 local authorities, with this question answered in 101 individual cases.

25

Case reviewers believed that the main changes to the system that would help deliver better support to young people aged 16+ with EHCPs were better utilisation of existing services and a more complete/comprehensive service offering.

For young people aged 16+, are they in the most ideal provision for them?

What did professionals in case reviews cite as the main reasons why children were not in the ideal provision or could not have accessed the support they needed through ordinarily available support?

0%

5%

10%

Gap in service offering

14%

The named school could not meet the child's need

14%

51%

25%

30%

11%

Lack/limit of inclusive practice within previous school Lack of information available to assessor

20%

29%

Missed opportunity to utilise existing services

49%

15%

9%

Lack of capacity

6%

Lack of parental confidence in mainstream setting

6%

Lack of Multi Disciplinary Team response

6%

Other

6%

YP is not in the ideal provision YP is in the ideal provision

The primary two reasons professionals highlighted for why children were not in the ideal provision and were not accessing the support they needed as ordinarily available support were around the availability and accessibility of services to support the preparation for adulthood.

Source: Case Review data aggregated for 19/21 local authorities, with this question answered in 101 individual cases.

26

Case reviews found that the outcomes/goals in 68% of EHC plans reviewed were not sufficiently SMART or personalised.

Professionals reviewed over 700 individual children journeys and EHCPs and were asked if they felt the goals in the EHCP were smart.

68% of the time professionals felt that the goals were not SMART or personalised to the child.

“Unclear why and how he is in this provision, his voice is overlooked he has reduced outcomes despite having big ambitions”

32% “The targets are not time bound, measurable or realistic”

68% “I could have matched any of the plans to any of the children, they were so generic”

27

In one local area, professionals commented on what they think is required to get high quality EHCPs that deliver good long-term outcomes. … and that EHCPs are written to secure support in the short term.

We need to refocus on the long-term outcomes for children and young people.

They noted that some EHCPs are written defensively, preempting systemic difficulties rather than focusing on the individual’s needs….

“

We see defensive plan writing, where content is included that should already come under Ordinary Available provision. It makes the plans quite inflexible but gives the parents faith.

There is inconsistency across schools over what counts as OA, so EPs write it all in the plan.

If a child or young person needs 1 or 2 OA provisions that is fine but if they need 20, that becomes expensive and difficult to implement without EHCP funding.

“

Not every child who has a plan at 5 needs a plan at 18. There is a balance in writing plans that serve long term interest but have short term outcomes.

We don't see great numbers ceasing before ceasing statutory education. It makes you question at what points we should be making significant changes to plans.

28

Education providers

29

We heard from primary and nursery SENCOs about the benefits and challenges of working with partners, managing transitions and supporting the delivery of EHCPs. 1

Working with partners

The Link Teacher and School Support Partnership have helped schools learn strategies and techniques that support a graduated approach. This knowledge gets further passed on to the wider teaching staff.

The delays in getting health assessments and access to services is detrimental to the child, their family and overall trust in the process.

Practitioners are feeling the need to suggest to parents they seek a needs assessment via GP referral to avoid waiting, with SENCOs themselves speaking with GPs on parents' behalf.

Practioners find conversations with parents can be challenging when trying to put in place what is best for the child. They feel they have to hold the line but don’t have good visibility of how needs will be met in the future.

One SENCO I know has made a referral through XXX Hospital and XXX Hospital just to see which one gets back first. She has worked with her own skills and experience and the girl’s grandparents whilst in this limbo period.

2

Managing transitions

A new initiative [called …] seeks to provide information and bits and pieces to next schools. This is working well and encouraging more interaction between settings.

More collaboration between settings and parents is seen as a positive for smoothing the transition.

A new addition this year is a touch base with all the parents of new starters. We often find the children are fine but parents have anxiety and want lots of meetings, trying to catch the teacher everyday. This has been met with positive comments.

A general challenge is more information is more paperwork. Getting settings to fill this out is difficult and there is a lack of standardisation and consistency across counties that makes this even more challenging. Additional annual reviews in year 6 summer would be good but is a huge workload.

One school offer a full week transition to year 6 which is really well received. Where additional days are offered to pupils with SEN this is often not with their peers and can be isolating.

3

EHCPs & support

Parents view the EHCP as guaranteed support and assume 1:1 adult time. Practioners find it hard to advocate for other provisions that are in the best interest of the child and feel undermined by the tribunal system.

They are also frustrated by the fact that a parent can apply with a two page letter whereas they are required to do a day and a half worth of work for the same outcome.

They are mindful to try to exhaust all other options before an EHCNA is asked for. One setting had their own handbook detailing their graduated responses. The [service] has been invaluable in accessing that support.

Practioners wanted to see: • More tailored and frequent training that can be accessed by all staff, particularly with early intervention in mind supporting new staff to know ‘what do early signs of ASD look like?’ etc.

• The ability to have more space and increased resources to support children • More staff and being able to retain experience • Time with specialists to support quickly as needed.

We’ve had SENCOs complete referrals even though they know it won’t be accepted just to help the parent understand.

30

Staff in mainstream schools said changing their ability to recruit additional specialist support staff would be the factor that would most enable them to provide better SEND support.

What do staff at Mainstream Schools think needs to change to provide better SEND support?

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Ability To Recruit Additional/Specialist Support Staff Increased 1:1 Support For Children And Young People Availability Of Extra Support From LA SEN Services Additional Training For Staff Availability Of Extra Support From Health/Social Care Higher Teaching Staff To Student Ratio Better Alignment With Parental Expectations/Parents Physical Adaptations To Social Spaces Inc. Playgrounds Physical Adaptations To The Classroom Accessible Curriculum Materials Online And Paper Improved Graduated/Ordinary Available Provision Offer Physical Adaptations To Setting Access & Corridors Changes To/Additional Toileting & Shower Facilities Supporting Other Children To Be More Inclusive On-Site Medical Support More Regular Review Of SEN At SLT Meetings More Flexible Setting Policies I.E. Uniforms

Based on survey data, staff at Mainstream schools think that changing their ability to recruit additional specialist support staff, and increasing 1:1 support for children and young people would enable them to provide better SEND support for children and young people within their schools.

Surveys of Education Providers from 17/21 of the local authorities in Tranche 2, with 1280 responses (Allowing multiple selections per response).

31

A deep dive in one LA showed that more children with an early years plan had their needs met in a mainstreams setting without an EHCP, compared to those who did not have early support.

Pre-Primary School

Primary School EHCP Referrals

Referral Outcomes

Assessment Outcomes

Children with EHCP aged 4-6 that enters primary school without prior support

100

98

98

referred

move to assessment

EHCP approved

0 assessment refused

2 awaiting decision

Children that receives EYSP prior to Primary School

89

27

19

21

referred

move to assessment

EHCP approved

62

7

left the system

assessment refused

5

1

receive HNF

awaiting decision

When children and young people are not known to the LA before primary school (i.e. their needs do not require support and they do not have an Early Years Support Plan), the majority of referrals for an EHCP in the first few years of primary result in a plan being issued (98%).

In comparison only 22% of children and young people with an Early Year’s Support Plan go on to receive HNF or an EHCP.

For this LA, they were able to support more children and young people with an Early Years Support Plan without the need for an EHCP. 32

In one local area, the most common view amongst SENCOs on what training would help deliver better support to their child was ‘bespoke training for specific needs’.

What would be the most useful training for teaching staff to be provided with?

“Training on how to support nonverbal children in a mainstream school”

“Training on assessment to identify specific needs and how to adapt lessons for this”

“Practical training on how to fill out EHCPs”

In a SENCO forum, SENCOs thought that the most useful training would be bespoke training for specific needs, training in the graduated approach and training to ensure curriculum materials are accessible to all.

33

Staff in mainstream have varying perceptions of the capacity and effectiveness of local specialist support providers across their local LA and health system.

How effective do staff in mainstream settings think the following services are?

The awareness of key local services by staff in mainstream settings

1120 responses

1195 responses Educational Psychology

Educational Psychology 1278 responses Speech and Language Therapy

1204 responses Speech and Language Therapy

1165 responses Occupational Therapy

1161 responses Occupational Therapy

1082 responses

1082 responses

Physiotherapy

Physiotherapy

1279 responses

1201 responses

CAMHS

CAMHS 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

I often recommend this

I sometimes reccommend this

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

I know it exists but I do not actively offer it

Never heard of it

Dont know

Disagree

Strongly disagree

1278 responses to this question from a total of 1641 responses 1201 responses to this question from a total of 1641 responses Most people are aware of services, with very few respondents responding to say they have never heard of it. However, there is significant variation in the number of practitioners who “know it exists and actively make referrals” ranges from 41% to 79% from mainstream education providers

Source: Surveys of Education Providers from 17/21 of the local authorities in Tranche 2, with 5900 responses.

34

Teachers surveyed were less confident in and aware of how to refer to specialist support services, compared to the headteachers and SENCOs surveyed.

Variation of Effectiveness by Respondent

Awareness & Service Utilisation by Respondent Educational Psychology

917 responses

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers

Educational Psychology

865 responses

Speech and Language Therapy

946 responses

Occupational Therapy

904 responses

Physiotherapy

827 responses

CAMHS

943 responses

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers Speech and Language Therapy 997 responses

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers Occupational Therapy

909 responses

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers Physiotherapy

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers

829 responses Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers

CAMHS

998 responses

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers

Teachers and TAs SENCOs Headteachers 0%

20%

I often recommend this I know it exists but I do not actively offer it

40%

60%

80%

100%

I sometimes reccommend this Never heard of it

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Dont know

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Teachers and TAs being the least aware and likely to refer to support services. On average 60% of staff at mainstream schools felt that support services were effective. In one local area, 75% of respondents from a mainstream school highlighted service capacity as the primary issue for why these services weren’t effective.

Source: Surveys of Education Providers from 17/21 of the local authorities in Tranche 2, with 4500 responses.

35

Data analysis

36

Historically, data indicates that High Needs Block cost increases have been driven primarily by more children than before having their needs met through an EHCP and, to a lesser extent, by increases in the cost of providing SEND support.

Tranche 2 has a similar proportion of the population with an EHCP to Tranche 1 as of 2022 (3.1%) and a similar unit cost per EHCP (£15.9k) but a lower population and therefore overall lower expenditure and lower allocation.

Tranche 2* Provision

2020 Spend

2022 Spend

% Increase in EHCPs

% Increase in Average Cost

% Increase in Spend

Mainstream Schools or Academies

£129m

£160m

22.3%

1.9%

24.7%

Maintained Special Schools or Special Academies

£251m

£306m

11.7%

9.0%

21.8%

NMSS or independent

£123m

£164m

31.4%

1.3%

33.1%

Other Settings

£195m

£218m

20.3%

-7.0%

11.9%

Total

£698m

£848m

19.4%

1.8%

21.6%

Tranche 2 expenditure has grown by 21.6% 2020 to 2022, which is a growth rate of 10.3%pa., compared to 13.2%pa. in Tranche 1.

Tranche 2’s growth is primarily driven by growth in number of EHCPs, which account for 90% of the HNB growth from 2020 to 2022.

Source: Revised Unmitigated Expenditure and Revised Unmitigated EHCP Data for 19/21 local authorities (*County Durham and Tameside are excluded, as we do not have 2020 EHCP data for these LAs).

37

Requests for EHCPs per capita have increased by 16% over the past 3 years.

The increase in numbers of EHCPs does not correlate strongly with increases in population or levels of deprivation.

20/22 % Population Growth

2020 requests

Expected EHCNA requests in 2022 based on 2020 requests

Actual EHCNA requests in 2022

Increase in requests per capita

1.3%

6689

6774

7852

15.9%

Correlation of Population Growth and EHCP Growth 2020-2022 (Tranche 2 Local Authorities)

Correlation of IMD Ranking and EHCP Growth 2020-2022 (Tranche 2 Local Authorities)

𝐑𝟐 = 0.09

𝐑𝟐 = 0.07

Correlation of Referral Requests per Capita and EHCP Growth Year-onYear (Tranche 2 Local Authorities)

𝐑𝟐 = 0.16

EHCP growth 2020-22 is not strongly correlated to Population growth or Deprivation. There is a weak correlation between having a high number of referral requests relative to the size of the population, and EHCP growth that year.

Local Authorities that have a greater number of requests per capita have a higher EHCP growth year-on-year.

There has been a 16% increase in the requests per capita over the past 3 years

Source: CYP Returns from each LA for 14/21 LAs. Data for 2022 is from Apr 2021 to Dec 2021, and so has been scaled up for a full year effect.

38

77% of all EHCNAs are issued between the ages of 3 and 12, with particularly high rates for children at primary and secondary transition ages.

25+

24-25

23-24

22-23

21-22

20-21

19-20

18-19

17-18

16-17

15-16

14-15

13-14

12-13

11-12

10-11

9-10

8-9

7-8

6-7

5-6

4-5

3-4

2-3

25+

24-25

23-24

22-23

21-22

20-21

19-20

18-19

17-18

0%

16-17

0%

15-16

2%

14-15

2%

13-14

4%

12-13

4%

11-12

6%

10-11

6%

9-10

8%

8-9

8%

7-8

10%

6-7

10%

5-6

12%

4-5

12%

3-4

14%

2-3

14%

1-2

16%

0-1

16%

1-2

FY 21/22 age of children and young people when an EHCNA is requested

0-1

FY 19/20 age of children and young people when an EHCNA is requested

77% of EHNCA requests aged 3-12, with 28% of requests for children aged 3-5 at the transition point between early years settings and primary school, and 22% of requests for children aged 9-12 at the transition point between primary school and secondary school..

Source: CYP Returns from each LA for 14/21 LAs.

39

There is a significant regional variation between the proportion of children in mainstream settings versus specialist schools.

Region

2022 % 2022 % children in children in RP/SEN mainstream settings with settings with an EHCP an EHCP

2022 % children in Special Schools with an EHCP

Tranche 2 LAs

East Midlands

36.0%

18.2%

26.1%

1

East of England

46.7%

4.4%

31.6%

1

London

54.8%

6.2%

24.8%

4

North East

36.8%

5.5%

32.6%

3

North West

34.1%

4.8%

41.5%

4

South East

32.3%

5.7%

40.2%

3

South West

39.1%

3.3%

36.1%

2

West Midlands

32.0%

3.1%

36.6%

1

44.2%

3.3%

26.6%

2

41.5%

4.9%

33.8%

21

Yorkshire and the Humber Total

There is significant variation in the proportion of children with an EHCP in mainstream settings by LA, and this can be seen regionally as well.

Source: Revised Unmitigated Expenditure and Revised Unmitigated EHCP Data for 21/21 local authorities

40

The overall distribution of EHCPs across different provisions has not changed in the past few years and overall numbers don’t appear to correlate with deprivation.

R2 = 0.05

More Deprived local area

Less Deprived local area

Provision

2020 EHCPs

2022 EHCPs

Change in provision mix

Resourced Provision or SEN Units

5.6%

5.3%

-0.3%

Mainstream Schools or Academies

41.0%

42.2%

+1.2%

Special Schools (Total)

34.8%

33.3%

-1.5%

Maintained Special Schools or Special Academies

29.0%

27.3%

-1.7%

NMSS or independent

5.8%

6.0%

+0.2%

Hospital Schools or Alternative Provision

3.8%

3.7%

-0.1%

Post 16

12.9%

13.4%

+0.5%

Other Expenditure

2.0%

2.1%

+0.1%

The percentage of children in each provision has not changed over the past 3 years.

The percentage of children in mainstream setting is not correlated to deprivation.

Source: EHCP and Expenditure Data for 19/21 local authorities . The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) ranks every small area in England from 1 (most deprived area) to 151 (least deprived area)

41

Most special school placements start after a child has already had an EHCP in a mainstream setting.

Distribution of Age of Start MSS, INMSS

Previous Provision Attended by children in Special School Provision 30.0%

100% 22.4%

25.0%

80% 70%

Percentage of Young People

Proportion of Young People

90%

26.9% 60% 50% 40% 30%

50.7%

20% 10% 0% Moved from Other Provisions (E.g., early years, hospital schools, Alternate Provision) Started in Special School Schoolswhen CYP first received an EHCP Mainstream Schools and Academies with prior EHCP

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0% 0-2

2-4

4-6

6-8

8-10

10-12

12-14

14-16

16-18

18-20

20-22

22-24

24-26

Age of Start in Special School

Historically, 51% of children and young starting in special schools had an EHCP in a mainstream setting.

43% of all special school starts occur at the early years to primary and the primary to secondary school transition stages.

42

Transition stages (from early years to primary, and from primary to secondary) are the main points at which children go into special schools. Over a quarter of children in special schools did not previously have an EHCP in a mainstream setting.

Distribution of Age of Start MSS, INMSS

Previous Provision Attended by children in Special School Provision 30.0% 100% 90%

70% 60%

26.9%

50% 40% 30% 20%

25.0%

22.4%

50.7%

10%

Percentage of Young People

Proportion of Young People

80%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0% Moved from Other Provisions (E.g., early years, hospital schools, Alternate Provision)

0.0% 0-2

2-4

4-6

6-8

Other Previous Provision

Source: CYP Returns from each LA for 15/21 LAs.

10-12

12-14

14-16

16-18

18-20

20-22

22-24

Age of Start in Special School

Started in Special School when CYP first Started in Special Schools received an EHCP Mainstream Schools and Academies with prior EHCP

8-10

Mainstream Schools and Academies with prior EHCP

Started in Special School when CYP first received an No Previous Provision EHCP

43

The data shows that starts in special schools relate to different types of needs at different ages.

Previous provision attended by children in Special School provision

Distribution of Age of Start MSS, INMSS 30.0%

Proportion of Young People

90%

Percentage of Young People

100% 22.4%

80% 70% 26.9% 60% 50% 40% 30%

25.0% 20.0%

SLCN - Speech, Language and Communication Needs

15.0%

SEMH - Social, Emotional and Mental Health

10.0%

Other Primary Need

5.0%

ASD - Autistic Spectrum Disorder

0.0% 0-2

50.7%

2-4

4-6

6-8

8-10

10-12

12-14

14-16

16-18

18-20

20-22

Age of Start in Special School

20%

Row Labels ASD - Autistic Spectrum Disorder

10% 0% Moved from Other Provisions (E.g., early years, hospital schools, Alternate Provision) Started in Special Schools Started in Special School when CYP first received an EHCP

Other Primary Need SEMH - Social, Emotional and Mental Health SLCN - Speech, Language and Communication Needs

2-4

4-6

6-8

8-10

10-12

12-14

14-16

16-18

18-20

20-22

28.8%

40.7%

32.9%

24.1%

28.0%

26.6%

20.5%

25.7%

34.4%

37.0%

33.4%

24.2%

19.8%

24.2%

29.5%

21.2%

19.6%

34.2%

40.6%

22.2%

2.5%

3.3%

23.6%

34.3%

24.2%

42.3%

51.9%

27.0%

6.3%

7.4%

35.3%

31.8%

23.7%

17.4%

18.3%

9.9%

8.0%

13.1%

18.8%

33.3%

Mainstream Schools and Academies

33% of all starts into special school post the age of 10 are for children whose primary need is Social, Emotional and Mental Health.

Source: CYP Returns from each LA for 15/21 LAs.

44

Analysis of data shows that the number of young people with EHCPs aged 16+ is getting larger, with increases at all ages between 16 and 25.

Breakdown of young people post 16 with an EHCP at start of FY 19/20

3500

3500

3000

3000

2500

2500

2000

2000

1500

1500

1000

1000

500

500

0

0 16

17

Post 16 Total young people aged 16+ with an EHCP 13077

Breakdown of young people post 16 with an EHCP at start of FY 21/22

18

19

Mainstream

20

21

Special Schools

22

23

Hospital/AP

24

25+

16

Other

17

Post 16

In post 16 settings

Mainstream

In Special Schools

Hospital/ AP

Other

59.5%

4.5%

14.7%

0.4%

20.9%

Total young people aged 16+ with an EHCP 18282

18

19

Mainstream

20

21

22

Special Schools

23

Hospital/AP

24

25+

Other

In post 16 settings

Mainstream

In Special Schools

Hospital/ AP

Other

51.3%

7.6%

19.6%

1.6%

20.0%

There is evidence of more young people ages 16+ in a variety of provision types, who on average are staying longer than they were previously with more young people post the age of 16 being supported in special schools.

45

There has been a small reduction in the rate of EHCPs being ceased at the age of 18.

Number of young people post-16 with an EHCP at start of FY 21/22 whose plan ceased before FY 22/23

Number of young people post-16 with an EHCP at start of FY 19/20 whose plan ceased before FY 20/21 100%

2%

5%

100% 10%

90%

14%

14%

10%

14%

16%

13%

17%

80%

70%

70%

60%

60%

50%

50%

40%

40%

30%

30%

20%

20%

10%

10%

16

17

18

19

20

EHCP still aActive

21

22

EHCP ceased

23

24

25

4%

7%

11%

11%

13%

13%

15%

14%

17%

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

90%

80%

0%

1%

0%

16

17

18

EHCP still active

EHCP ceased

3 years ago, 17% of young people who had an EHCP post the age of 16 had their plan ceased by their 18th birthday. However, last year this number was only 12% of young people.

46

The cost of independent sector placements does not appear to correlate with the number of children in specialist placements in the local area.

Unmitigated Average Cost per EHCP for INMSS and statemaintained special schools

Unmitigated Avaerage Cost per EHCP Forecasts

60.0k 55.0k

INMSS cost if trends continue

50.0k 45.0k

FY21/ 2022 Unit Cost

40.0k 35.0k 30.0k

State-maintained special schools’ cost if trends continue

25.0k 20.0k 15.0k 10.0k 2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

FY Ending

2027

2028

FY 27/28 if trends continue FY 27/28 if trends continue + 3% inflation FY 27/28 LA Modelled Unit Cost increases in LB

Statemaintained special schools

INMSS

Cost difference

£21.9k

£45.7k

£23.8k

£25.6k

£53.9k

£28.3k

£27.4k

£57.3k

£29.9k

£28.1k

£67.9k

£39.8k

If historical trends in unit cost continue (excluding additional inflationary pressures) for maintained special schools and independent special schools, then the average cost difference between supporting a child in a maintained school vs the independent sector will have risen to £30k per child by 2028, resulting in an additional £114m a year based on the current volume of children in the independent specialist sector.

Source: Revised Unmitigated EHCP Data for 21/21 Local Authorities, combined with EHCP forecast data.

47

The cost of independent sector placements does not appear to correlate with the number of children in specialist placements in the local area.

Average cost of state-maintained special schools in FY 21/22 vs the caseload of children in state-maintained special schools

£100,000

£100,000

£90,000

£90,000

£80,000

£80,000

£70,000 £60,000 £50,000

Average cost = £43k

£40,000 £30,000

Average cost of MSS in FY 21/22

Average cost of INMSS in FY 21/22

Average cost of INMSS in FY 21/22 vs the caseload of children in INMSS

£70,000 £60,000 £50,000 £40,000 £30,000

£20,000

£20,000

£10,000

£10,000

Average cost = £22k

£-

£0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Total number of children in INMSS in FY 21/22

800

900

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Total number of children in state-maintained special schools in FY 21/22

48

Analysis of primary needs shows increasing the capacity of the state maintained sector to support children with a primary need of SEMH would go further in reducing reliance on the independent sector.

Primary needs of children and young people split by first provision named on EHCP 100% 90% 80%

PMLD 70%

MSI HI

60%

VI SLD

50%

PD 40%

SpLD MLD

30%

ASD 20%

SLCN SEMH

10% 0%

Mainstream schools and academies

Other Support

Maintained Special Schools or Special Academies

Independent or Nonmaintained Special Schools

Resourced or SEN Units

Post 16 and Further Education

In one local area, analysing the primary needs of children in different settings found that the independent special school sector supports 2-3 more children with SEMH than any other provision type.

49

What the diagnostics to date are telling us about how outcomes for children and young people with SEND can be improved.

Through the diagnostics carried out so far, the evidence gathered suggests that there are three most common and impactful thematic ways in which outcomes for children and young people with SEND can be improved by local areas whilst working towards financial sustainability (reducing unmitigated growth of spend). The themes are easy to summarise but delivering these improvements will require complex, system wide transformation with support from all local partners.

The thematic opportunities for improvement include: 1. Ensuring that a greater proportion of children with SEND receive appropriate special educational support for their needs in their mainstream schools through ordinarily available provision.

2. Ensuring that children are placed appropriately in local special schools and receive high quality, effective provision.

3. Ensuring that EHC plans deliver effective outcomes, and that an increasing number of post-16 young people with SEND are able to continue into further education, employment or training through ordinarily available provision.

These may not be the three priority opportunities for improvement in every single local area, but the evidence suggests that these three opportunities are the common, high magnitude opportunities to improve services for children with SEND.

50