Written evidence from Justify Foundation (SEN 68)
Education Committee
Solving the SEND Crisis
The request specifically asks for contributors to provide input on the solutions rather than evidence of the problem. However, it is important to have a good understanding of the problem in order for confidence that the solutions will be effective.
Significant increase in SEND?
There has been a significant increase in SEND over the years and this is likely down to a number of reasons.
1) Parents are more informed of their rights mainly thanks to charities, advocates and the dedication of parents to educate themselves so they can advocate for their children.
2) Schools under financial pressure have used various ‘positive’ means (supporting EHCNA) and negative means (exclusion) which exacerbates the mental health of the child such that an EHCP becomes essential.
3) In too many schools there is a high degree of ignorance in neurodiversity and/or prejudice against SEND children. Whilst this continues, children’s mental health and attendance at school will continue to decline resulting in more specialised care or non-attendance. The important point here is that SEND includes those who are ‘mildly’ affected all the way to severe. Children on the lower end of the spectrum could thrive and prosper in school where there is understanding and support but are seriously traumatised through ignorance and prejudice and the child’s mental health deteriorates to such a level that they become ‘high needs’. In some cases, children have been removed from school as it has become a safeguarding issue for the child. In one case the Headteacher told the parent he could ‘punish adhd out of your child’. When this inevitably failed, the headteacher excluded the child. This level of ignorance and prejudice needs to be tackled head-on.
Local Authority Response
The local authority in turn has been put under budgetary pressure and focused on unethical and unlawful means to stem (‘gatekeep’) demand by either refusing EHCNA or delaying EHCP’s to remain within their budget. This will not be admitted by the Local Authority’s, but the evidence tells a different story.
Some 40+ local authorities have also unlawfully set a ‘target’ to reduce compliance with their 20-week EHCP duty (from the 100% stipulated in law) to defer their costs into subsequent financial years.
The result has been a significant increase in tribunals, judicial reviews and complaints to the ombudsman all of which amounts to a significant (£100’s millions) sums wasted on legal proceedings.
Many local authorities have under-invested in Special Schools so rely on expensive external/private schools or costly transport to schools that are a considerable distance away from the locality.
The issue here is that there has been significant under investment and mismanagement by local authorities that has exacerbated the problem.
However, the narrative from local authorities often frames the parent as the ‘problem’ and their ‘naughty’ children draining the resources away from ‘other priorities’. This creates enormous animosity and distrust; It legitimises prejudice and is dehumanising.
Solutions:
The solution is not to ‘reward’ the local authority’s unlawful conduct by reducing or eliminating the duty they have under the law (and deliberately breaching), but rather to strengthen the law and protect vulnerable children.
1) The law should be changed to remove the ability for the Local Authority to argue or challenge that there is no need to provide an ECHNA. This could save up to £100m per year in tribunal costs.
2) There needs to be a concerted and funded effort to educate schools on neurodiversity and importantly how to detect, adjust and accommodate those with special educational needs. This would significantly reduce the number of children who require EHCP’s, specialist schools or worse completely loosing out on education.
3) There should be mandatory training for all staff and graduates in neurodiversity and in techniques, methods and approaches that empower and educate staff to positively engage, and support SEND children. SENCO’s often have little power or influence in schools and often are ‘used’ as a tool to support the school’s position and defend its actions.
4) A SENCO needs to be appointed to the Senior Leadership Team of each school and accountable for the treatment of SEND children.
5) A child with an EHCP should be protected against permanent exclusion unless a fully independent SEND panel agrees that the school has exhausted all possible avenues to support the child and has fully complied with the EHCP.
6) An independent SEND professional should write the EHCP to ensure that it follows SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, relevant, Time-bound) principles.
7) A SEND Auditor should be able to inspect schools and investigate failings by the school to implement EHCP’s and have the power to direct the school to comply. This would avoid the costs of tribunals and move the burden of enforcement from the parents to the state.
8) Therefore, an independent, evidence and science led approach to improving SEND should form the bedrock of any proposed solutions.
9) Whilst there is a need for more money, this money should be used to drive positive change not to reward the failure of schools and local authorities to protect and educate the most vulnerable children in society.
10) Whilst there is always pressure on national/local budgets, the government should conduct a Cost-Benefit-Analysis on further investment as it will become clear (if done independently) that the savings are likely to be significant and possibly as much as £10 saved for every £1 invested.
About Justify
Justify Foundation is a small charity that provides support and advocacy free of charge and currently operates without funding. It is often engaged with those who are unable to get legal aid and/or where the client is unable to find legal representation. Increasingly the charity is involved in, and conducts research on, the area of SEND particularly where the school or local authority have acted unlawfully.
January 2025