SCN0128

Written evidence from St Martins Governing Body

 

 

  1. We would firstly like to thank you as a Governing Body at St Martin’s special school, a secondary school for children and young people aged 11-19 with additional learning needs, for the opportunity to respond to such a crucial Inquiry. As a school we pride ourselves on our aspirational learning environment and believe through hard work and a positive contribution our young people can be supported toward independence and a successful future.

 

  1. When the Government introduced its wide-reaching changes to the SEND system in 2014, with the intention of offering simpler, improved and consistent help for children and young people with SEND, providing greater choice in decisions for families, this was very much welcomed. However, the implementation of the reforms has been problematic, and we find that our children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities are continuing to face many barriers to learning.

 

 

Assessment of and Support for Children and Young People with SEND and Transition to EHCP

 

  1. The new Education Health and Care Plans (EHCP) which Government introduced in 2014, to provide a more holistic and efficient SEND support for learners up to the age of 25 was very much welcomed. Unfortunatly, the reality is that the SEND system has left many learners and their families extremely stressed. The process of an EHCP assessment is supposed to take no longer than 20 weeks.  However, for some, poor planning in some local councils, and hastily planned meetings, or none, has led to inadequately “joined up” EHC Plans.  The reality is that a proportion of these Plans are no more than cut and paste from the previous Educational Statement of Need. The EHCP Code of Practice stresses that learners and their families should be involved in decision making throughout the process.

 

  1. We are also aware of some families who have highlighted concerns in relation to specific mental health needs for children and young people, and the local authority and its partners refusing to include this in the EHCP due to financial implication rather than identified need. This subsequently led to challenge at tribunal, and the appeal process being upheld. We would like to highlight that this caused a sense of frustration, stress and injustice for the families involved.

 

The Level and Distribution of Funding for SEND Provision

 

  1. We welcome Clauses 25-26 and the integration and joint commissioning arrangements. We are however doubtful that this is truly working in practice. For example, we highlighted above the issues for some young people and their families, and the barriers accessing mental health support.  We understand there are several young people aged 16+ in school who need such support. The anxiety caused for these young people caused by the delay in getting the right support means that they are failing to reach their full potential in their transition toward adulthood. This in turn means that their attendance at school becomes erratic, placing further strain on their families.

 

  1. Whilst we accept as a Governing Body there is a statutory duty on joint commissioning, there is however no legally enforceable way for Health or Social Care provision to be delivered under EHC plans. To be truly effective, it is imperative that Health and Social Care have a statutory duty to deliver the support needed for an EHC plan.

 

 

The Roles of and Co-operation Between Education, Health and Social Care Sectors

 

  1. As a Governing Body we welcome Section 3 of the SEND Code of Practice to improve outcomes for 0-25-year-old children and young people. As a school, we have formed many positive working relationships with partner stakeholders but must question how this partnership working is informing joint commissioning arrangements. We would draw your attention to our previous concerns in relation to mental health support services. We would also question how joint commissioning draws accountability for our key partners.

 

  1. As a Governing Body we are also aware of the struggle a few families have had in relation to accessing Personal Budgets. Whilst we accept Personal Budgets may be a good idea, the families concerned found it difficult to gain access to an accurate assessment of need by the LA to inform this budget. We understood that they subsequently had to gain support from a Local Government Member to ensure that this process happened. This caused considerable stress on the families at the time.

 

  1. Within the next section, Provision for 19-25-year olds, we shall highlight the significant frustrations and barriers encountered. However, this demonstrates how there appears to be not only a lack of understanding in the joint working and commissioning arrangements for SEND, but importantly, a fundamental gap in hearing children and young people and their families in these commissioning arrangements.

 

Provision for 19-25 Year Olds Including Support for Independent Living; Transition to Adult Services, and Access to Education, Apprenticeships and Work

 

  1. At St Martins school the Headteacher, through her leadership has been instrumental in shaping Horizons 6th Form, its post 16 provision. The Governing Body is also extremely fortunate to have the skill base of experienced knowledgeable   Governors who actively assist in taking the independence agenda forward. We are also very proud of receiving our 3rd Outstanding Inspection from Ofsted. In October 2017, they found:

    “Post-16 provision at Horizons is outstanding. Leaders base their ‘Shaping Futures’ curriculum firmly around practical skills and attributes required for the world of work”.

 

  1. Horizons students have achieved many positive accolades. The 6th Form have their own enterprise business ‘Gallery 5’ a printing and bespoke furniture business. Please take the time to look at their arts and crafts and handmade furniture on the web.  There is also a partnership with a local college where students attend the fitness gym with a personal trainer.

 

  1. We firmly believe that Project Horizon is an incredible opportunity for young people, and we have proven its success with the transitions that our young people have previously made. We are fortunate through the dedication of the school and its many stakeholders to have many new and exciting opportunities for 19-25-year olds. Horizons are fortunate to be able to work with many external agencies, including the YMCA and others.

 

  1. Together we share a clear ethos, to make enhance the life chances and employability of Post 16’s. It is evident that this group of young people need more opportunities post 18, before they are ready to work. However, unfortunately, local government have also placed considerable barriers in our way, declining to allocate places based on funding. This causes us grave concern, not only do our vulnerable young people lose out on opportunities, but the local council miss out on revenue when these young people eventually enter the workforce.

 

  1. A further barrier that has been raised, is the lack of choice and inclusivity for SEND young people at a local college. We noted that there was only one subject offered at Entry Level 3. This student had also attended St Martin’s from the age of 12. As the local colleges failed in their duty to provide a suitable or interesting course, the student has had no alternative to register at a college offering a bespoke course, which was some distance away.  Travel by bus will take 2 hours each way. This young man, who is supported by an EHCP, is understandably very vulnerable. It is unacceptable that young people with SEND are not being provided with equality of opportunities needed, and that they are having to overcome additional unnecessary barriers.

 

  1. It is our understanding that the legislation of SEND is to support young people from 0-25 years. The above demonstrates that LA are failing to plan educational opportunities for the over 18’s. At St Martin’s opportunities are provided, but frustratingly barriers from local government are difficult to overcome. As a Governing Body, we would like to see an emphasis, as well as statutory legislation, to ensure that post 18’s, subject to an EHCP, are tracked in their transition arrangements by local authorities until the age of 25.

 

  1. Many of our vulnerable learners desperately need these extra years to achieve.  Legislation could be tightened up to ensure that the Bill’s aims are met for those aged 18-25 and that they are not let down. This, statutory duty   to ensure that Health and Social Care are accountable too, would hopefully mean that the Bill’s aims are met:

  “meets their need and supports them to learn to ensure that they are able to thrive and climb the ladder of opportunity”

 

 

 

June 2018