SEN0884
Written evidence submitted by The Association of Directors of Children's Services Ltd
solving the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) crisis
The Association of Directors of Children’s Services Ltd. (ADCS) is the national leadership organisation in England for directors of children’s services (DCSs). Under the provisions of the Children Act (2004), the DCS acts as a single point of leadership and accountability for services for children and young people in a local area, including children’s social care and education.
ADCS is committed to the principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion which are fundamental to all areas of our work. We are committed to highlighting issues of disproportionality, discrimination and systemic barriers that limit opportunity where they exist, recognising that not all children, young people and families are impacted equally. ADCS welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Education Select Committee’s call for evidence in relation to solving the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) crisis.
As the call for evidence states, there is a wealth of evidence to suggest that the current SEND system is broken. ADCS members would agree that the case for change has been made, the SEND system is unsustainable and outcomes for children and young people have deteriorated over the last decade, despite record levels of spend (see NAO, 2024). Implementation of the Children and Families Act 2014, along with subsequent changes to the funding system, has resulted in the SEND system becoming detached from mainstream education.
The Committee’s inquiry is focused on solving the SEND crisis, however, ADCS members would suggest that it is essential to view SEND as part of the wider education system which has become less inclusive over time. Given the erosion of inclusion, it is no surprise that there has been a growth in demand for additional support; it is the result of an inadequately funded education system that places academic achievement above all else, with regulatory and funding arrangements that reinforce this. Reform is urgently needed and this should be rooted in the principles of inclusive mainstream education. ADCS has previously published a policy statement setting out a vision for an inclusive education system, one that is rooted in place and draws together partners to work collaboratively for the benefit of all children in an area.
There are many interdependencies here, ahead of any significant reform to the SEND or education systems, measures in the Children’s Wellbeing and School Bill will help to foreground inclusion in the system and act as building blocks for future reforms. It is right that all mainstream state funded schools, irrespective of governance arrangements, teach the national curriculum to ensure all children are accessing a broad and balanced education as part of an inclusive system that has a coherent offer to children and families. The government’s curriculum and assessment review should also feed into any future reforms in this space.
Many other measures in the Bill will also support transformation; the power for LAs to direct an academy school to admit a child, along with the duties for all schools to co-operate with the LA around place planning will be helpful in allowing LAs to meet their duties and ensure all children can access education in a timely way. The end to the legal presumption that new schools should be free schools, allowing proposals from local authorities and others, is similarly welcome. LA have the place planning duties and understand the needs of their communities and how these can be best served.
In the Autumn Statement, £3.5 billion was announced to support school rebuilds and to fund improvements to the school estate. It is vital that schools’ capital investment policy and decisions align with SEND policy and supports the direction of travel of increased inclusion in mainstream settings. The previous government’s centralisation of place planning via the use of the free schools programme contributed to the challenges now faced, a huge increase in EHCPs plus delays in the capital programme directly resulted in greater use of non-maintained school placements as well as higher home to school transport costs to out of area placements.
A holistic cross-DfE and cross-government approach to inclusive education is needed to provide the initial scaffolding for long-term reform. Recent announcements from the Secretary of State suggest that this is the direction of travel, plus the appointment of Dame Chirstine Lenehan as a SEND National Adviser and the creation of an Expert Advisory Group chaired by Tom Rees. A new vision for education, rooted in inclusion, cannot come soon enough and in the short-term, addressing some of the current tensions in the system would be a helpful first step. For example, there is an obvious link between the Department’s push on attendance, the promotion of a zero tolerance behaviour policies and record levels of exclusions. More recently, the Ministry of Justice has published a consultation on changes to the SEND Tribunal process which seem to sit at odds with the direction of travel outlined by the new government.
The Isos Partnership, commissioned by the Local Government Association (LGA) and County Councils Network (CCN), recently published research exploring the need for fundamental reform of the SEND system in England. Towards and effective and financially sustainable approach in SEND in England sets out, across eight recommendations, a vision for reforming the approach to inclusive education and additional needs. This has been broadly welcomed across the sector as the starting point for a future blueprint for reform.
The importance of the early years and early childhood development is key. Between 2017 and 2024, the number of EHCPs for children under 5 has increased by 134% from 11,348 to 26,527. Children, particularly in the early years, develop at differing rates. The Covid-19 pandemic has also had an impact for this cohort with concerns about school readiness coming to the fore. ADCS members would question if EHCPs are the correct response for children, who are not yet of statutory school age, and may be experiencing developmental delays. Consideration is needed as to how best we can help and support children before they start school, along with their parents, when early concerns are identified.
ADCS members believe that if we get it right in the early stages of a child’s life and build parental confidence, resilience and skills from the start, we can fundamentally shift the system as children progress through it. More must be done in these important first years to identify children’s needs and provide the right support as early as possible, to avoid escalation of needs but also to support additionally being delivered in mainstream settings. This is particularly relevant given the government’s opportunity mission target of 75% of children reaching a good level of development by 2028. Linkages with the family hubs agenda as well as family help reforms set out in Stable homes built on love will be important here.
ADCS has been considering what short- to medium-term actions might help to alleviate some of the immediate pressures in the system, while also helping to lay the foundations for more fundamental reform.
The contribution of health partners to the SEND agenda remains somewhat ambiguous; responsibilities and accountabilities are not well aligned. The lack of focus on, and prioritisation of, children and young people in recent health reforms and the operation of integrated care systems have been highlighted in three recent reports, see Lord Darzi’s review (DHSC, 2024), the Institute for Public Policy Research health and prosperity commission (IPPR, 2024), and the latest Care Quality Commission state of the nation report (CQC, 2024). A cross-government view is needed to clearly articulate the role of health bodies and services in supporting children, and where expectations are not met, the appropriate bodies need to be held to account. This is not currently happening. Where area inspections identify concerns, the LA is held to account and must lead on the response that follows, even if the challenges identified lie in the education or health systems.
ADCS members have long raised concerns about the Area SEND inspection. The current inspection process is inspecting a world that currently does not exist and with no clear articulation of what ‘good’ looks like; it is an assurance of local systems and partnerships that everyone agrees is in crisis. Government must pay more attention to its role in creating the conditions for success, including offering a clear vision and narrative, providing commensurate resources and ensuring a sufficient workforce. These conditions are not present, but judgement inspections persist. Given the challenges in the system are so systemic, it could be suggested that the process is merely judging how well areas can mitigate these, rather than how effective they are at meeting the needs of children and young people with SEND.
Given the context in which we are now working, in response to Ofsted’s Big Listen, ADCS called for a pause in ASEND inspections. Ofsted has confirmed that ASEND inspections will continue, however, Ofsted and CQC are in the process of reviewing the framework and monitoring visits have been paused while this review is taking place. In any updated inspection framework, it will be critical that responsibilities and accountabilities are aligned to partners within the system and that the process recognises the systemic challenges and national policy drivers that cannot be solved at the local level.
The ambiguity in the language used in the SEND Code of Practice has contributed to the increase in demand for SEND services. Amendments could be made in relation to:
ADCS would welcome a review of the role of the independent sector where excessive fees are one of the most significant pressures on the SEND system. Independent non-maintained special schools (INMSS) are entirely funded by the public sector, and yet the fees are significantly higher than maintained provision. Consideration should be given to bringing INMSS into public ownership so these schools can effectively contribute to the specialist capacity across a local place, in parallel with the development of “ordinarily available” provision and support in mainstream education settings so the needs of more children can be more effectively met outside of the specialist sector.
Funding is a critical issue, with growing children’s services budget deficits driven by SEND demand and systemic barriers to meeting this rising need, means the risk of multiple LAs tipping into insolvency is growing, see the recent Public Accounts Committee report on this topic (PAC, 2025). Similarly, the recent National Audit Office report on the SEND system found that almost half of LAs (43%) will have deficits exceeding or close to their reserves in March 2026 (NAO, 2024).
While the statutory override originally provided much needed breathing space for local authorities, this short-term exemption from general funds cannot continue indefinitely. The financial implications of the high needs block deficit going back into general funds would be catastrophic for most. Transferring the deficit to the national debt would remove a burning platform and allow the focus to be on delivering better experiences and outcomes for children, young people and families, a shift that is long overdue. However, this can’t be a one-off transfer, the transfer of funding between the various blocks of the dedicated school grant, which was severed by funding reform under the last government, should be re-established. This would allow funding to be used flexibly to meet additional need as and when needed.
Over the last decade, the financial pressures associated with home to school transport have become unsurmountable. Modelling done by the Isos Partnership predicts SEND school transport will almost triple over a decade – from £397m in 2018/19 to £1.125bn in 2027/28 – with the number of children eligible for free school transport increasing 122% over the same period, from 58,000 to 129,000, driven by the 2014 SEND reforms and a subsequent increase in the number of children receiving EHCPs. There has been little appetite to review the legislation which dates back to the Education Act 1944, however, the Department could review the statutory guidance to place more emphasis on travel options other than taxis and door to door transport, such as independent travel training.
The statutory walking distance of two miles for children under eight and three miles for those aged eight and over do not reflect the realities of widespread car ownership or the connectivity of public transport. Many children also quality for the mobility component for disability living allowance. Where this is the case and parents are receiving this benefit on behalf of their child, it is not unreasonable to expect this to be used to transport children to school. There is a clear link here in terms of preparing young people for independence and at present, home to school transport guidance provides no levers to promote this agenda to parents and young people.
To discuss any of the issues raised in this submission further, please contact ADCS Chief Officer,
January 2025
4