|
Memorandum submitted by Dr Simon Jenner, Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council
1.1 This is a submission from Dr Simon Jenner, Strategic Manager/Principal Educational Psychologist, employed by Wigan MBC, Children and Young People's Services.
1.2 My qualifications are B.A (Hons), P.G.C.E., M.Ed., D.Ed. Psych., C.Psychol., C.Sci, A.F.B.P.S.
1.3 I have over 23 years experience as a teacher and an educational psychologist. I am also classified as disabled.
2. How might assessment of SEN be undertaken other than by the relevant local authority without the establishment of a new separate agency for this purpose?
2.1 This question has an assumption built into it that it would be a desirable thing for the local authority not to carry out assessments of SEN, which I can not fully support. The reasons for this are as below:
2.1 i. Any assessment of SEN only makes sense within the teaching and learning context. Assessments out of this context have the danger of placing the needs of the young person within themselves, rather than as an interaction between the young person and the learning context. Assessments are best when carried out over time, in a multi-professional way. To be just within child is not in the spirit of inclusion, and can lead to resources being continually allocated to individuals, whilst in many circumstances some of the resource would be most efficiently and effectively utilised on improving the setting. By setting I refer to school, early years settings and home environment. It is only professionals, working within the context of the particular local neighbourhood/ authority, and within the ethos of setting improvement, that have this rounded picture. This picture would be difficult to gain if the assessment occurred by a body employed out of the local authority context.
2.1.ii. Any assessments should occur in an interagency way (e.g. within the Change for Children context) to be fully effective. Assessments from an outside agency would be difficult in any context where they occur within a local setting, for instance in co-located teams. It is only by the understanding of the local context that disabilities and/or SEN can be understood. If both concepts are viewed as a social construction ("I have learning difficulties due to no differentiation occurring "or," I am disabled because I can not access the physical environment") then they can only be assessed with a full understanding of the local conditions for learning, via an interagency assessment. An interagency approach looks at a holistic view of a child/ young person, rather than a "one-off " assessment, which would be more likely from an external body to the local authority.
2 1.iii. Interventions/ assessments should occur at as early a stage as possible. Within Wigan we have firmly placed the statutory assessment process in the context of appropriate learning opportunities occurring, for instance, Wave 3 approaches , and with an assessment of the effectiveness of these. It is our experience that those schools which request most statutory assessments of SEN are frequently those who are not using their resources effectively to meet needs at earlier stages of the graduated approaches of the Code of Practice on SEN. By carefully reviewing the process of intervention prior to request, help and guidance can be given to providers in regard to making the most effective use of resources, and meeting young peoples' needs earlier, often before they escalate. There is a danger that if the assessment process is taken out of the local authority, then this early intervention will occur less frequently This will push more resources to meeting young peoples' needs at a later stage. If assessments occur later, often at a stage when small learning environment changes can not produce the significant changes earlier interventions can produce, more resources in terms of both professionals and finance have to be utilised and positive outcomes for young people are harder to achieve. This is not to say that there are a group of young people who have significant needs, whatever the learning environment. However, this group is small and, if interventions and assessments occur at a later stage, the resources they require will have to be shared out with a children and young people who have not had their needs met at an earlier stage.
2.1.iv Resources need to be used appropriately and effectively. In the majority of local authorities between 20-25% of educational resources are used to support additional needs. These go into such budget streams as mainstream school budgets, enhanced provision/units, special schools, out of borough provision and SEN support services. There are always pressures on these budgets. Decisions around provision have to always look for the best possible local provision (continually seeking to improve this) but also to take account of the code definition that it is not always the most expressive provision that is sought, but that that leads to at least (my emphasis) adequate progress. A good analogy with a pupil without SEN is that a placement at an expensive private school should not always be sought, but that all provision should be looking to help all pupils make the best possible progress. In many instances it is not more resources that are required, but different teaching and learning programmes. The danger of assessments occurring outside of the local authority is that expensive recommendations could occur, ignoring the local learning context, leading to further pressures on budgets, and the need for a major injection of funds from central government into the local authority context.
2.1.v There could be difficulties in changing the significant variations between local authorities if the assessment was to occur from , say, a regional body. Decisions about the proportion of resources that go directly into school's budgets to meet additional needs, or to the assessment process and statements vary between local authorities. The assessment process (e.g. within child factors vs. process driven) also varies. The above has developed organically, within each authority context, and the framework of the Code of Practice and various laws over many years. To have a non local authority body carrying out assessments would mean that these local variations would need to significantly change, leading to potential major disruptions in meeting many pupils' needs whilst these changes occurred.
2.2 One possible model that may work is bringing in legislation that separates assessments and provision within local authorities. Therefore two separate organisations, with clear guidance as to their role and function would. However, there are dangers here in increasing bureaucracy, therefore taking provision away from young people in order to fund this.
3. How might local accountability for assessment be maintained if the local authority does not directly undertake the assessment?
3.1 Previous comments relating to finance need to be addressed here. It is important that the accountability means that children and young people who have the most significant needs have access to the resources required, and that it is not just those young people with carers/advocates who have the most eloquent voices and/or resources who access educational provision.
3.2 The current local democratic process in which local politicians manage the local services and are answerable to the public, gives checks and balances, along with the legislative frameworks. This would be difficult if a separation of assessment out of the local authority context occurs.
4. What other issues need to be addressed in order to make the separation of assessment and provision effective?
4.1. These can be summarised, in my view, as:
· Ensuring resources are appropriately targeted · Reducing, not increasing, bureaucracy · Ensuring that effective provision occurs at earlier parts of the Code of Practice of SEN · Meeting the needs of the most vulnerable young people appropriately · Also meeting the needs of all young people, for instance in ensuring that they too have appropriate resources for a proper education. · Working to improve provision at the earlier stages · Placing assessments in a local context for both the authority and setting the young person attends · Full multi-professional assessments of need · Having the assessment as a partnership with the setting and carers and other agencies · Ensuring that the local democratic process is not by-passed · Not generating a system that could place financial strains on local authorities that can not be met, other than by the significant input of central government funds
5. Whilst models from other countries could usefully be drawn on to demonstrate how separation of assessment and funding for SEN might be achieved?
5.1. Personally I do not know of other models but care must be taken that other systems can not be transplanted, without regard to the local and national context. At the forefront of any system must be that both the needs of the most vulnerable children and young people and of all children and young people are met.
May 2007 |