Memorandum submitted by Connie Mergen, Strategic Leader, SEN and Inclusion Policy and Planning, Education Walsall, part of Serco

 

As professionals in a local authority that has been identified as a 'HUB' of good practice in relation to SEN & Disability, we would like to make the following comments in relation to the above Education & Skills Committee call for responses:

 

On the presumption that local authorities would continue to fund special needs provision, the Committee is seeking views on the following issues in particular:

1) How might assessment of special educational needs be undertaken other than by the relevant local authority without the establishment of a new separate agency for the purpose?

· We need to encourage parents to move beyond thinking that the only way appropriate provision can be made is through assessment and a statement and be more consistently following recommendations in Removing Barriers and the Every Child Matters.

· Making assessments within the graduated response set out in statutory guidance detailed in the SEN Code of Practice ensures that the educational 'context' is taken into account consistent with well documented evidence on the effects of environment on outcomes. Looking at assessment outside the SEN Code of Practice de-contextualises the process.

· There may be additionally negative outcomes if assessment is undertaken without appropriate reference to:

o The implications of a primarily 'child deficit' model which has the potential to focus on weaknesses and promote attitudes counter to inclusion affecting the right for every child to be educated in mainstream provision

o A potential for an increase and inherent conflict for parents dealing with one "organisation for assessment" and one 'organisation delivering provision'

· Parents already pay for assessments by private professionals. These relatively 'context-free' assessments cause conflict between them and local authorities. Private assessment practice is a response to the commercial opportunities of arising from current conflicts in the system and is not 'value-free' in addressing the individual child/young person's needs. Separating assessment from provision could extend these commercial opportunities, increasing the possibilities of conflict between parents and all other agencies involved and could possibly lead to increased litigation

2)How might local accountability for assessment be maintained if the local authority does not directly undertake the assessment?

· If independent assessments are undertaken, there would be no way in which a locality could be accountable for the recommendations made. The commercial environment of assessment provides parents with support of their perspectives on their child's needs which is not necessarily consistent with what the child's needs are in actuality. This could possibly be at the expense of equality of opportunity.

3)What other issues need to be addressed in order to make the separation of assessment and provision effective?

· The implications of a primarily 'child deficit' model which has the potential to focus on weaknesses and promote attitudes counter to inclusion affecting the right for every child to be educated in mainstream provision

· A potential for an increase and inherent conflict for parents dealing with one "organisation for assessment" and one 'organisation delivering provision'

4)What models from other countries could usefully be drawn on to demonstrate how separation of assessment and funding for special educational needs might be achieved?

· There has been an increase in funding into school's budgets to meet special educational needs which supports the recommendations in the Removing Barriers Every Child Matters. Local authorities now monitor SEN provision in schools to support building capacity to meet SEN across the authority. This is a good system because it ensures that everyone is responsible for meeting SEN in schools.

 

July 2007