Written Evidence Submitted by ASK Research

(CLL0040)

1. Introduction

1. ASK Research is an independent research organisation. We specialise in high quality, informed research aiming to influence policy and advise service provision, especially around issues concerning groups who face social disadvantage.

2. ASK Research undertook research on children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) registered at special schools and colleges in England during the Covid-19 pandemic.

3. ASK Research was supported by the National Foundation for Educational Research (for provider survey data collection and analysis) and Rob Webster, Associate Professor, University College London Institute of Education.

4. Our research was funded by the Nuffield Foundation. The Nuffield Foundation is an independent charitable trust with a mission to advance social wellbeing. It funds research that informs social policy, primarily in education, welfare, and justice.

5. Our first report - Special Education during lockdown: Returning to schools and colleges in September - was published in September 2020. Our second report is due to be published early 2021.

6. Our submission focuses on four key areas of the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference: Coronavirus: lessons learnt – 1) impact on social care, 2) impact on Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) and other at-risk groups, 3) government messaging and 4) the UK’s preparedness for a pandemic. The inquiry only asks for information about the impact on social care. We provide information on the impact on health and social care to provide evidence on how the pandemic has affected children with SEND on Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) in specialist settings. These children require holistic support from education, health and social services.

2. Background

7. The ASK Research study aimed to explore the experiences of special schools and colleges and the parents of children who usually attend these settings during the Covid-19 pandemic. The research was undertaken during the period of the first national lockdown – covering education over March 23rd – July 31st 2020.

8. Children who attend special schools and colleges all have an EHCP. An EHCP is a legal document that identifies a child’s educational, health and social needs and sets out the additional support that must be provided to meet those needs. During the Coronavirus outbreak, the government classed children with EHCPs as ‘vulnerable’ and therefore a priority to continue to attend their specialist schools and colleges. However, the legal requirement to provide support specified in children’s EHCPs was suspended for this period (March - September) by the Coronavirus Act 2020.

9. Children with EHCPs attending special schools and colleges have a wide range of additional support needs including personal care and one-to-one support.

10. Over a third of the specialist schools and colleges we surveyed had more than half of all their pupils requiring personal care and around a third have more than seven in ten pupils requiring one-to-one support.

11. The findings are based on fieldwork carried out between 3 July and 3 August 2020, namely:

• a representative survey of 201 senior leaders of special schools and colleges in England.
• a survey of 515 parents or carers whose children attended schools and colleges participating in the survey, or who opted in via other organisations supporting children with SEND.
• in-depth interviews with 40 providers and 40 parents or carers.

3. Findings relevant to Select Committee Inquiry

3.1 Impact on health and social care sector

12. Vital health and social care support for children with special educational needs and disabilities was lost or reduced.

13. The health and social care services that many children with SEND in special schools and colleges and their families rely on were redeployed to support other areas of the pandemic or were working from home and unable to carry out visits and therapy sessions.

14. Specialist schools and colleges did what they could to support this loss in services. However, they had to juggle providing this with providing education places in their special school/college and/or remotely, as well as offer support for families struggling to cope. Schools and colleges had to do welfare and safeguarding checks, plus provide emotional support that they are not skilled or trained for.

15. Just under a third of special schools and colleges (28%) reported that they were unable to provide any healthcare support for pupils at home at all over this period. 14% were unable to do this for pupils in school, and around half could only provide this to a small or moderate extent.

16. Three quarters of special schools and colleges (76%) said they were unable, or only able to a small or moderate extent, to provide social care support to pupils at home (and for 56% of pupils in school).

“Social services were absolutely missing in action.” Provider interview

“When they were needed most, they all withdrew.” Provider interview

17. This meant children with special educational needs and disabilities lost months of the vital health and social care input that would normally be a legal entitlement of their education, health and care plan leading to regression of skills – learning, development and personal. Providers and parents were concerned these children may never catch up or require different and additional input as a consequence.

18. Lost healthcare included:

• cessation of Child and Mental Health Services input.
• cancelled hospital and medical appointments and provision of specialist equipment.
• lack of therapies including speech and language therapy, physiotherapy, hydrotherapy etc.

19. In terms of social care, families lost personal care services, respite support and short breaks provision. This left them struggling and feeling isolated with adverse effects on mental health and wellbeing.

20. Specialist schools and colleges expressed concern about the range of safeguarding issues they had identified during lockdown as they tried to plug the gap in social services support. Examples included finding support for children who ran away, or were moving out of care, who were involved in criminal activity or self-harming as well as support for parents who were dealing with substance misuse, domestic violence or mental health issues. Special schools and colleges felt ill-equipped to deal with these effectively in the absence of functioning social services.

21. Almost three-quarters (72%) of school and college leaders thought that a significant proportion of their pupils would require a greater amount of support after lockdown than was set out in their EHCPs because of the loss of input and increase in anxiety brought about the pandemic and change in provision.

22. Our research suggests that health and social care support is not only required for children with SEND but also for their families too.

3.2 Impact on BAME communities and other at-risk groups

23. Children and young people, with SEND can be considered an at-risk group in terms of disadvantage (their families are more likely to be more eligible for free school meals[1]), medical vulnerability (around a third of parents we surveyed said their household were shielding) and having poorer life outcomes[2].

24. Family life in lockdown was difficult with families reporting receiving little or no external support and struggling to balance caring for a child with SEND with other commitments. This, combined with worries about work and the future, meant many parents of children with SEND found lockdown isolating and exhausting. Some children found the change to their routine a challenge to adapt to resulting in increased emotional and mental health issues and more challenging behaviour.

25. A range of perceived impacts were reported both for children with SEND and their families.

26. For parents and carers the lockdown period was seen as likely to lead to negative physical, emotional and mental wellbeing effects on parents as well as putting strain on family relationships and finances.

27. Pupils were thought likely to suffer from worse mental health and wellbeing, have issues with regulation and behaviour management, have lacked progress in education and lost or regressed mobility and social and communication skills.

28. Children with SEND attending special schools and colleges may be impacted for longer as they have been less likely to return to school from September 2020. 84% of special school and colleges leaders we spoke to thought some families would not send their children back to school in September 2020. This prediction proved true, with attendance data (at the most recent data point at the time of writing), showing that around one in four pupils have not been attending special school in England[3].

29. Children with SEND have not gone back to their special schools and colleges because:
• parents were concerned about the potentially increased risk because their child was medically vulnerable or because they were from a Black, Asian or minority ethnic background.
• clinically extremely vulnerable pupils have been advised not at attend school during the second national lockdown period (November 5th -December 2nd 2020)[4].

• specialist provision had changed in order to manage the risks of the virus and there were concerns about how this would affect the child – emotionally and physically.

30. Children with SEND attending specialist provision were doubly disadvantaged during the pandemic.

31. They not only lost their usual education but also their usual legal entitlement to health and social care despite the fact the government deemed them ‘vulnerable’.

32. They are more likely to be unable to adhere to recommended guidelines to help keep them safe when in school. For example they are more likely to: be unable to adhere to social distancing, require close contact because they need personal care, be unable to wear a mask and cope well with changes to routine.

33. In addition, they may face greater barriers to accessing remote education. Pupil needs may mean they are unable to access content online. Even when they are, on average, providers thought around 30% of families at their school or college had little or no IT access at home[5]. Roughly one in three providers said that this was the case for over 35% of their families. Limited IT access was reported as more of an issue by settings with higher rates of FSM (with 37% of their families having limited access) than those with lower rates of FSM (22% of families at these schools were felt to have limited access).

34. They require learning and input that is differentiated and personalised to need – placing greater pressure on their special school or college at a difficult time when all were learning about how to respond to the pandemic.

“My friends in mainstream are moaning about having to film and upload their lessons. But I point out they do it once for 30 kids. I have to make 15 versions of every lesson to suit each of my children.” Provider interview

35. They had less learning time than their mainstream counterparts. Parents of children at special schools and colleges reported being unable to do much home-schooling.

36. It is harder for their families to teach and support them because of their special and complex needs and because learning was not, or could not be, the parents’ priority at this time (e.g. because it was a full-time job to care for their child, to keep them safe, happy and occupied.

37. Within our at-risk sample of children with EHCPs, some sub-groups were affected even more than others.

38. Parents from BAME groups in particular told us that they were too worried to send their child in to school or college and/or would choose to shield during the pandemic.

39. Compared with schools and colleges serving less deprived communities, special providers with higher proportions of pupils eligible for free school meals were more likely to experience staffing issues, not be able to maintain health and care input, not be providing pupil feedback on learning, have higher rates of families without access to IT and report lower pupil engagement.

3.3 Government communications and public health messaging

40. There was a reported lack of clarity on guidance for services delivering in special settings (education, health and care) and mixed public messaging.

41. Specialist schools and colleges, and parents reported receiving conflicting and frequently changing messages from Government and Public Health England as well as unions and the media.

42. This lack of clarity and consistency led to disparities in the provision offered for pupils in special schools and colleges – including whether pupils’ provision was open and whether or not they could or should attend.

43. Special schools and colleges interpreted risks differently and parents were unclear and unconfident about the safest course of action for their child. This affected attendance opportunities and levels for pupils with SEND in specialist provision.

44. Health and care staff working in educational settings received different advice from their professional bodies and unions to that given to education staff. They were told to stay at home when education staff were told to provide places for pupils in school.
45. Different LAs interpreted guidance differently meaning they set different requirements and practices. This placed additional burdens on special schools and colleges who offer places to pupils from a number of different LA areas.

3.4 UK’s prior preparedness for a pandemic

46. Our evidence suggests that the government was ill-prepared to support special schools and colleges in the event of a pandemic. There was a lack of advice on risk and direction on whether:
• children with SEND were medically vulnerable and should shield.
• children were safer at home or safer at their special school or college.
• residential provision should stay open and how to operate safely. A quarter of our provider sample offer residential placements to pupils.
• staff and children should wear PPE and masks.

47. Schools and colleges had to decide this for themselves. Different settings and different services made different decisions based on their personal interpretation of risks.

48. In addition, there was a lack of PPE, no contingency planning, no back up for staff shortages and no plan for family support continuing for these vulnerable families. Special school and college leaders told us they felt the government “lacked understanding about the sector” and parents felt “abandoned” and “ignored”.

4. Implications and Recommendations

49. Central and local government should:

• Ensure that education, health and social care provision is retained for pupils with SEND in special schools and colleges. For these children, health and social care input is as important as education.

• Issue better/clearer guidance on safe in-school delivery that appreciates the needs of specialist provision and the specific needs of the ‘vulnerable’ pupils and families they serve.

• Ensure communication is consistent and joined-up across agencies and relevant to those in the specialist sector.

• Provide more detail on how to support pupils in-school AND those who are at home (because they are self-isolating or have concerns about school safety) due to the heightened risks of catching or being more severely affected by the virus.

• Reassess if funding is sufficient to meet the needs of pupils with EHCPs given the dearth of education, social and health care provision over many months. Although catch-up funding is greater for pupils with SEND than other pupils, it is not clear that this will be enough to cover increased costs arising during the pandemic (e.g. for PPE, making premises Covid-secure) and into the future (e.g. for extra support to mitigate impacts from loss of education, health and social care, address effects on physical and mental health and provide additional support for whole families).

50. Children with SEND in special schools and colleges require more than educational input. At the time they were needed most, many health and care services families rely on were unavailable. In future there must be a way to continue these services’ input so as not to risk the safety and life chances of disabled pupils and those with special needs.

51. There is a need to improve the holistic support across all three services and to support the whole family and not just the individual child. This cannot be provided by schools and colleges alone. It needs a joined-up effort and planning across education providers, LAs, health and care services, additional support services and government.

5. Reports

52. Links to our published reports and our future outputs:

• Special education during lockdown: Returning to schools and colleges in September

https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Special-schools-during-lockdown.pdf

• Future outputs will be published in early 2021 and can be found at:

https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/project/covid-19-mitigation-education-provision-and-special-schools

(November 2020)