CBSAG Notes on CBC's SEND Schools for the Future Plan - Central Bedfordshire SEND Action Group

Please enable JavaScript to view the full PDF

Appendix A Understanding future need and capacity - Methodology 1. Aligned to the methodology used for the mainstream Schools For the Future Programme, 1-1 meetings were held with each of the Special School Head Teachers individually as a first step in February and March 2020 to discuss their site and any limitations or opportunities alongside future growth, designation, and age range. 2. Following the individual school meetings, a workshop was held in April 2020 to co- produce a methodology for forecasting Special School places. This methodology focused on the volume of Central Bedfordshire maintained Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), geographical spread and primary need of the child and used current data overlaid with demographic growth outlined in the Local Plan. The forecast was then agreed at a final workshop in June 2020. These workshops were attended by headteachers from Weatherfield, Ivel Valley, Oak Bank and Chiltern Schools. 3. Further individual meetings were held with the Special Schools during September and October 2020 to discuss the impact of the forecast on the schools individually and to develop school specific proposals. 4. Finally, workshops were held in October 2020 with the four special school head teachers and the ARP providers to discuss the proposed plan concerning pupil numbers and potential sites. - The methodology for forecasting places is fundamentally flawed because it is based on the CURRENT number of children with EHCPs and in specialist placements. There are many children who need EHCPs and specialist placements but don't have them due to CBC's failures. Basing the methodology on these statistics creates an artificially low forecast! - Mainstream schools appear to have been overlooked when designing the methodology. Why have they not been involved in developing the forecast when they are crying out for support? They are struggling to cope with children who can't get a specialist placement due to lack of capacity. They are bearing the brunt of CBC's failure to assess children with SEND who need an EHCP. CBC also claim they want to improve SEND Support in mainstream schools to reduce demand on specialist placements - have mainstream schools had any input into this methodology, forecast and plan? - Home educated children have been entirely overlooked in this report and in the methodology. There should NOT be an assumption that home educated children with SEND do not want a school places b because many of them have been forced out of the system. This applies to those with EHCPs and those who gave up on the system because they couldn't get an EHCP or the right support. - By law, children from out-of-county have a right to apply for these places. There is no mention of how this has been accounted for in the methodology or the impact it will have on places. There is also no mention of how many out-of-county children are currently using CBC's ARP school places. - The final forecast was agreed at a meeting with special school Heads. Why weren’t ARP Managers part of this final decision, especially given that the shortage of ASD provisions is such an enormous part of the problem? - Have CBC accounted for all of the children who are on part time timetables and those who are being repeatedly excluded? These children are likely to need provision above and beyond what a mainstream school can provide. - How have mainstream schools that have a higher than average number of children with EHCPs (e.g. Henlow), been accounted for in the methodology, forecast and plans for the future? They have no ARP but provide outstanding support at their own expense. - CBC are committing to re-writing EHCPs to a standard that meets statutory requirements. requirements. If children's If children's needs areneeds properlyare properly identified, identified, this should this should lead to more lead to more appropriate provision being included in Section F of the EHCP. Have CBC considered the impact this will have on the need for specialist provision and school places? - Have CBC considered the fact that they have been misleading schools and SENCOs about the criteria for EHC Needs Assessments for many years and forcing them to follow a deeply unlawful Graduated Response document? Now that awareness of the lawful criteria is being raised, CBC can expect to see a considerable increase in Needs Assessment requests and in turn, requests for specialist placements. - There has been no recognition of the fact that when a child needs a special school or ARP place, they need it immediately, not in 9, 10 or 11 months time. Currently, children who go to panel in October (or any other time of year) have to wait until the following September to get the school place that they need. Suitable places should be available throughout the year. Projections made in 2016 for 2021 were highly inaccurate. By 2020 we had 1850 EHCPs. - Have CBC reflected on and learned from the highly inaccurate forecasts they made about SEND in 2016? SOURCE: https://www.jsna.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/jsna/info/4/developing_well/116/children_and_yo ung_people_special_educational_needs_or_disability_send/2?fbclid=IwAR0WefRGhcNTveF 8zoY6wJSP6N-c5-2_fySzI9W0ZPLv0qnYfRPyeG_6a9Y Central Bedfordshire Council 05 January 2021 Executive Schools for the Future – Special School and Additional Resource Provision request to commence have your say consultation Report of: Cllr Sue Clark, Executive Member for Families, Education and Children ([email protected]) Responsible Director: Sue Harrison, Director of Children's Services ([email protected]) This report relates to a decision that is Key Purpose of this report 1. To provide the Executive with an update on work undertaken with Special Schools and Additional Resource Provisions and to request permission to launch a Have Your Say consultation on proposals to increase places in Additional Resource Provisions and Special Schools. RECOMMENDATION(S) The Executive is asked to: 1. note the methodology undertaken to date to develop a forecast for Special School and Additional Resource Provision places; 2. note the proposed support provision for children and young people with SEND in mainstream schools, Additional Resource Provision, and Special School provision and the need for increased places in Additional Resource Provision and Special Schools; 3. note our proposals for the four Special School and the Additional Resource Provisions; and 4. approve the launch of a Have Your Say consultation. Overview and Scrutiny Comments/Recommendations 1. The Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee will form part of the Have Your Say consultation as a consultee and then will also consider the results of the have your say consultation prior to this going to Executive. Schools for the Future – Programme Overview 2. According to the Local Plan, Central Bedfordshire is an area that will grow - with up to 43,000 new homes expected by 2035. The expected growth has significant implications regarding pupil place planning as the Council has a statutory duty to ensure that there are sufficient school places for children residing in Central Bedfordshire. Current forecasts suggest there will be an additional 24,672 pupils by 2035. 3. Schools for the Future is an ambitious programme of work taking place to raise educational standards through the provision of places required across Central Bedfordshire in line with the Local Plan. A strategic and co-ordinated approach is required to ensure change is planned and managed effectively. Schools for the Future We want to develop a coherent and transparent plan for our future educational landscape that is shaped by all our schools, mapping out where existing schools can expand, what additional schools we will require and the structure our schools will take over the next 15 – 20 years. This plan will help to ensure we achieve the best educational outcomes possible for our children making best use of public money. The right schools, in the right places, delivering the best education 4. The objectives of the Programme are to: • Ensure sufficient places (appropriately located) to best meet demand from housing growth • Improve educational outcomes at all key stages • Shape the future educational landscape - to provide clear educational pathways and reduce the number of transitions • Deliver best value – to ensure viability • Facilitate more school-based SEND (Special Educational Needs & Disability) provision, early years provision on school sites and school-based post 16 provision 5. Schools in Central Bedfordshire meet in a number of local clusters (9 in total, 8 geographical and one dedicated to the Special Schools and Additional Resource Provisions) to consider how they can work together to provide the best education for children. These local clusters in the main mirror our local planning areas. As part of the Schools for the Future Programme, officers have been working with clusters to model future school place requirements in each of these areas, in line with our expected housing trajectory. 6. The Have Your Say consultation is the first part of the required process for changes to the organisation of schools. It provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to share their views, including school governors, staff, parents and carers of children, plus Trade Union representatives, Parish Councils, all schools and academies within Central Bedfordshire, the local Church of England Diocese, local Member of Parliament and all Council ward Members. 7. After the Have Your Say consultation, if the decision is to proceed with the changes, the school organisation processes are set out in paragraph 54. 8. The plan detailed in this paper will ensure we meet increased need resulting from demographic growth. It will ensure we are delivering help at the first point of need so young people have additional support at the right time and in the right location. 9. Central Bedfordshire Council wants to wherever possible support young people in their mainstream schools. For those who require additional support, Additional Resource Provisions (ARPs) should be a local option and for children and young people with more complex needs, sufficient Special School places need to be provided. Mainstream Schools 10. Central Bedfordshire’s 132 mainstream schools all support children with SEND. Each governing body has a governor who is responsible for school SEND strategy and a SENCO (Special Educational Needs Coordinator) who is responsible for ensuring children with additional learning needs are supported in school. 11. The Schools for the Future programme will review each school on a case-by-case basis to ensure that wherever possible schools have a designated multi-agency space to give sufficient physical capacity for the school to lead and develop appropriate multi- agency plans around a child. SENCO's have What is the uptake for this training? Do mainstream SENCO's have the the time time and and resources resources to to take take this this on? on? 12. There is a revised and strengthened training and development programme, supported by specialist SENCO study groups, in order to support our SENCOs and aspiring SENCOs. Physical capacity is redundant without staff who have the skills, expertise and time to work with children in these multi-agency spaces. Teachers and TAs (not just SENCOs) need extensive training and experience to be able to meet the needs of the children who will be using these rooms. CBC must learn from the failure of the Ardley Hill ASD provision, where unsuitable staff were put in a shiny new provision and the children ended up being mistreated because the staff weren't trained or competent. When considering national percentages, remember that SEND children are being failed nationally. These figures shouldn't be targets, if anything, they should be assumed to be too low! 13. The number of pupils receiving SEND Support in mainstream schools in CBC has risen from 4700 to 5000 in the last three years but remains just below 12% of the mainstream population which is line with the national rate of 12.1%. Is this the true number of children who require SEN Support or are there many who are being overlooked? 14. As of June 2020, Central Bedfordshire Council had approximately 1850 Education Health Care Plans (EHCPs) for pupils in Reception to Year 14. Of these: • Over 85% of pupils with EHCPs are attending settings within Central Bedfordshire. • Overall, around 57% of pupils with EHCPs are at mainstream schools / colleges, including nearly 70% of pupils with EHCPs in the primary phase, 50% in the secondary phase, and 40% in post-16 (see Chart 1). • Approximately 35% of pupils with EHCPs have a primary need of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), approximately 20% each have Social Emotional Mental Health (SEMH) or Speech Language Communication Need (SLCN) as their primary need, and 10% have Moderate Learning Difficulties (MLD). See Chart 2. Chart 1: Breakdown of EHCP Numbers by Phase (a) 1000 All Provisions 902 900 Mainstream School 800 Special School 700 666 615 Independent Special 600 School There are 5 bars on the EHCPs 500 400 chart and only 4 colours 329 300 265 291 291 in the legend. What do 200 the turquoise bars 112 132 100 39 represent? 0 20 11 35 8 0 Primary (YR - Y6) Secondary (Y7 - Y11) Sixth form (Y12 - Y14) School Phase Why are home educated Chart 2: Breakdown of EHCP primary need numbers by phase (a) children with EHCPs not included on this chart? Special Educational Needs & Disability Acronym Key Need Acronym Autism Spectrum Disorder ASD Social Emotional Mental Health SEMH Speech Language Communication Need SCLN Moderate Learning Difficulties MLD Severe Learning Disabilities SLD Physical Disability PD Hearing Impairment HI Specific Language Difficulties SpLD Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties PMLD Visual Impairment VI Based on these figures, we would question whether some young people's EHCPs are being ceased prematurely. Where are the figures for young people 1400 who are beyond sixth form age? An EHCP can be maintained until the age 1200 of 25 if they are in any kind of education, training or apprenticeship 1000 (excluding higher education). 800 EHCPs The figures on this chart are 600 concerning as they suggest that not 400 many young people still have their EHCP to support them beyond Sixth 200 Form. 0 ASD SEMH SLCN MLD SLD PD HI SpLD PMLD VI Where are all of these children and Primary Need young people ending up???? Total Primary (YR - Y6) Secondary (Y7 - Y11) Sixth form (Y12 - Y14) (a) When pupil numbers are below 5 they have been excluded from the chart to ensure anonymity. appropriate 15. Schools, ARPs and Special Schools all support children and young people according to where they are on the continuum of need. Wherever possible, children are supported at a mainstream school. Where their needs are more complex, we have ARPs, sited on and run by mainstream schools which enables specialist support where required, as well as integration into mainstream education where this is beneficial. For those children who have complex needs which cannot be met by mainstream or ARP and we have four Special Schools - all of which are rated good or outstanding by OFSTED. How are CBC's ARPs rated by OFSTED? Will new ARPs be placed in Good or Outstanding schools? Will CBC learn from their mistake of putting an ARP in a school that 'Required Improvement' as they did with Ardley Hill? Current Provision and Need 16. The Schools for the Future Programme has a focus on geographical clusters as a way to manage change. Following discussion with the Special School Head Teachers, a proposal was formed to also develop a separate cluster for specialist provision, given the needs of the pupils. There are clear links and dependencies with the geographical clusters particularly when considering site disposal or identification of new sites. 17. The map below shows the existing geographic spread of the Special Schools and ARPs provisions by designation. 18. The distribution of these provisions is based on the old Bedfordshire County Council organisation and does not offer equitable geographical access to Central Bedfordshire Council children. This change happened 12 years ago. Why are CBC only addressing this now? There should NOT be an assumption that local or national statistics on EHCPs and special school places actually reflect the reality of the situation that families are facing. Children with SEND are being failed and overlooked locally and nationally. Figure 1: Current Special Schools and ARPs KEY: AP - Alternative Provisions are the Jigsaw/Academy of Central Beds; ASD - Autism Spectrum Disorder; HI -Hearing Impairment; SEMH - Social Emotional Mental Health; SLCN -Speech Language and Communication Need. Additional Resource Provisions (ARPs) 19. ARPs are dedicated facilities on mainstream school sites that provide support to children and young people with additional needs. Children and young people get a balance between the mainstream curriculum and support from the ARPs. How many? 20. There are approximately 100 ARP places in Central Bedfordshire across 14 schools. This equates to approximately 5% of students with EHCPs. The ARPs provide support to students equivalent to 10% of ASD EHCPs, 4% of SEMH EHCPs, 4% of SLCN EHCPs, majority of HI EHCPs. 21. The current ARP provision is located at the following Schools: School Designation Phase ARP Progression (Primary onwards) Ardley Hill1 ASD Primary Manshead Manshead ASD Secondary N/A Ramsey Manor ASD Lower Arnold Arnold ASD Middle Samuel Whitbread St Swithun’s ASD Primary Biggleswade Academy Biggleswade Academy ASD Middle phase Samuel Whitbread Samuel Whitbread ASD Upper N/A Lancot SEMH Primary No ARP progression Silsoe SEMH Lower Toddington St George HI Lower Parkfields Parkfields HI Middle Harlington Harlington HI Upper N/A Heathwood SLCN Lower No ARP progression St Andrew’s SLCN Lower No ARP progression 1 Ardley Hill is scheduled to close following consultation. Figure 2 – Locations of ARPs Special Schools 22. Special schools offer provision that is different from, or in addition to, that which is normally available to pupils of the same age. Need for a Special School is determined through the EHCP process and offers students with complex needs an educational setting that is suitable for them. - What has the COST of the failure of this ARP been to CBC? - In early 2020, Sue Tyler told us that the Ardley Hill provision was full, so where are these children going to move to? - Have the children who were mistreated at this school been provided with therapy or compensation for trauma and loss of education? - Were CBC found to be at fault for these these failures and have the families involved received an apology from CBC? 23. Currently, 37% of pupils with Special Educational Needs with EHCPs are educated in a Special School setting (plus 1% in Independent Special Schools). In October 2020, the four Special Schools in CBC had approximately 700 pupils, of which nearly 600 have EHCPs maintained by CBC. 24. The current Special School provision in Central Bedfordshire is as follows: Current Provision Special School Location Designation Age range Places Chiltern Dunstable • Autistic Spectrum Disorder 3-19 225 • Moderate Learning Difficulties • Severe Learning Difficulties • Profound Multiple Learning Difficulties Ivel Valley Biggleswade • Moderate Learning Difficulties 3-19 200 • Severe Learning Difficulties • Profound Multiple Learning Difficulties Oak Bank Leighton Buzzard • Social Emotional Mental Health 9-19 115 Weatherfield Dunstable • Moderate Learning Difficulties 7-19 150 Figure 3: Current Special School Locations 25. Figure 4 shows the locations of pupils on roll at Special School in Central Bedfordshire combined with the locations of those schools. Figure 4: Pupil location – Pupils on roll at Special Schools(a) (a) When pupil numbers are below 5, they have been excluded from the map to ensure anonymity. 26. Chart 3 shows a summary of the primary needs of children and young people attending the four Special Schools. Chart 3: Primary need of Special School Students Weatherfield Oak Bank Ivel Valley Chiltern 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% ASD HI MLD MSI PD PMLD SEMH SLCN SLD SpLD VI -- There There isis no no mention mention of of how how many many of of our our ARP ARP placements placements are are taken taken by by out-of-county out-of-county children. children. - What are the primary needs of children on the SEND register who are in mainstream schools? - What are the primary needs of children who have been forced into home education (we would guess ASD plays a big part here). - What are the primary needs of children who are on EOTAS (Education otherwise than at school)? CBC need to clarify how many children are travelling out of county through choice and how many are doing so because there is no suitable provision available within the county. Are these placements the result of parental preference or parental desperation?! Pupils Travelling Out of Area 27. There are currently approximately 150 pupils with EHCPs who live in CBC who attend provision that is located in another local authority area. Around half of these pupils are attending mainstream schools or FE / Sixth Form Colleges, approximately 60 are attending special schools, and approximately 25 are attending independent special schools. Forecast need for Special School and ARP places as per population growth 28. If the percentage of children and young people with an EHCP remains at the current level (4.4% of the mainstream pupil population), then the number of children and young people with plans will increase in line with projected population growth as follows (see Chart 4): • Between 2250 and 2300 EHCPs by 2024/25 (+400-450 on 2019/20) • Between 2550 and 2600 EHCPs by 2029/30 (+700-750 on 2019/20) Based on the current division of primary need, that would include: • Children and young people with ASD rising from 650 to approximately 800 by 2025 and then 900 by 2030; • Children and young people with SEMH from 400 to 500 and then 550; • Children and young people with SLCN from 350 to 425 and 500. Whilst not all of these children will need specialist provision, consider how many would benefit from an ASD ARP early in their schooling, BEFORE they hit crisis point. Very few academically able autistic pupils get ARP placements until they have been completely broken by the mainstream system. Support them early and they MAY need less intervention as they get older. Give them a headstart to a successful, fulfilled adulthood. WHY are CBC basing forecasts on the current percentage of children with EHCPs, when they admit that they have been applying unlawful barriers to EHC needs assessments for years? This figure is not a true reflection of how many children SHOULD have an EHCP at this moment in time, so it should not be used to predict future EHCPs. If it is, then we can only assume that CBC intend to continue raising the bar for EHC assessment above the legal criteria. Additionally, this figure will only remain consistent if CBC actually support SEND children in mainstream adequately. If they don't, then more parents will be forced to apply for an EHCP. Chart 4: Projected numbers of young people with an EHCP 3000 70000 2500 60000 50000 2000 40000 Pupils EHCPs 1500 30000 1000 20000 500 10000 0 0 2019/20 2024/25 2029/30 ASD Primary Need SEMH Primary Need SCLN Primary Need Number of EHCPs Total Pupil Projection 29. If 5% of children and young people with EHCPs access an ARP, then the capacity of ARPs will need to increase in line with the growth in EHCPs as follows (see Chart 5): • Between 113 and 115 ARP capacity by 2024/25 (+13-15 on 2019/20) • Between 128 and 130 ARP capacity by 2029/30 (+28-30 on 2019/20) Chart 5: Projected ARP use 140 70000 120 60000 100 50000 ARP Places 80 40000 Pupils 60 30000 40 20000 20 10000 0 0 2019/20 2024/25 2029/30 Number of ARP places % EHCP students accessing ARPs Total Pupil Projection 30. If 37% of children and young people with EHCPs continue to need a Special School place (which is the current proportion), the number of Special School places will increase in line with projected population growth as follows (see Chart 6): • Between 825 and 875 Special School places by 2024/25 (+125-170 on 2019/20) • Between 950 and 1000 Special School places by 2029/30 (+150-295 on 2019/20) • Based on current pattern, by 2030: o Children and young people with a diagnosis of ASD would be 300 – 350; o Children and young people with a diagnosis of SEMH 200; WHY are CBC using this percentage to forecast future need when there is absolutely no doubt that there aren't enough ARP or special school places available places NOW?? If all children who needed these spaces had them (today), then this percentage would be significantly higher. Again, CBC are basing future need on the amount of provision we have now, NOT on the amount of NEED there is now. o Children and young people with a diagnosis of SLD / PMLD around 150 and MLD approximately 150. Chart 6: Projected Special School places 1200 40 35 1000 30 Special School Places 800 25 Pupils with EHCPs (%) 600 20 15 400 10 200 5 0 0 2019/20 2024/25 2029/30 ASD Primary Need SEMH Primary Need SLD / PMLD Primary Need MLD Primary Need Number of Special School Places % with EHCPs accessing Special School Anecdotal evidence from our 1000+ followers would suggest that the rate in CBC is 6% below the national average because CBC have been forcing children to stay in mainstream schools due to a lack special school places! 31. It is worth noting that nationally 43% of pupils with EHCPs are educated in Special Schools. The Special School place projections referred to are based on the current circa 37% rate – should the needs of children require that percentage to increase towards the national average then the increase in the number of places required would be accelerated. The Council’s ambition is to retain the percentage of EHCPs maintained in Special Schools at 37% through effective provision in mainstream schools including through ARPs. The number of EHCPs should be based on CHILDREN'S NEEDS, not on an ambition to hit a random number!!!! Our Vision for Future Provision If a child needs a special school or ARP, forcing them to stay in mainstream will only damage them and increase their Mainstream School Inclusion future needs. Stop smashing square pegs into round holes to cut your costs! 32. We are committed to supporting children and young people to remain in their mainstream schools wherever possible. appropriate 33. Multi-Agency/Nurtures Spaces – We are committed to including Multi-Use/Nurture Spaces in mainstream schools where sites are not constrained to allow for space for teaching and learning alongside therapies (including speech and language, emotional wellbeing and mental health services) and the early help offer from the Local Authority. - How will these spaces be staffed? - See point 11. Ensure as few moves as possible by giving the child the provision that meets their needs straight away, rather than testing out a cheaper option first. Too many CBC children have been through 3+ schools before they are even of secondary school age. 34. Support for the child and the setting – We are committed to devising clearer pathways for children and young people to move in and out of provision depending on their needs. Schools have highlighted the need for clearer pathways into and out of the Special Schools alongside the ARPs to support the changing needs of children and young people. Alongside this, a more consistent approach and access to other agencies as well as professional development for staff including sharing practice between schools is required. This is planned to be further reviewed with the Special Schools It's really important and to use the ARPswe expertise to already develop a clear have, support but make offer. sure that the special schools and ARPs have the resources to provide this support AND run their own settings. ARPs in particular, don't have many staff. 35. Special Schools - We will co-construct an advice/support offer with the Special Schools in support of inclusion work with mainstream settings. This forecast is fundamentally flawed, as per our Additional Resource Provisions (ARPs) comments on previous pages. Therefore CBC have on previous pages. underestimated Therefore the future needCBC have massively for ARPs. 36. Using the forecast forecast need need for forARP ARPplaces, places,we weare areproposing underestimatedproposing ananadditional the future additional need 9292places for ARPs. in in places new and existing ARPs across Central Bedfordshire. 37. Work is underway with existing ARPs to expand places based on resources and facilities available. CBC must not lose sight of the fact that ARPs work because they are small. Overfilling ARPs would make them less effective. Overfilling ARPs would make them less effective. Long term proposals from 2023 Cluster Need Phase New? Places Dunstable and ASD Primary 8 Houghton Secondary 12 Regis SEMH Primary 8 Harlington ASD Primary 6 Secondary 6 HI Primary 8+8 Secondary 8 SEMH Primary 8 Sandy ASD Primary 8 Secondary Y 8 Shefford and ASD Primary Y 8 Stotfold Secondary 121 SLCN Primary Y 8 Secondary Y 8 Biggleswade ASD Primary 8 MLD Primary Y 8 Secondary Y 8 SLCN Primary 8 Secondary Y 8 Leighton and ASD Primary Y 8 Linslade Secondary Y 8 SLCN Primary 8 Secondary Y 8 1 Assumed to need expansion from existing capacity 38. The proposed long term increase in ARP provision will provide an additional 72 places and provide a greater geographical distribution (as seen in Figure 5). What does this mean? Will it not be permanent if it doesn't work? 39. Children’s Services will also pilot additional ARP provision in the Shefford and Stotfold cluster to support 20 children with high performing autism. We expect a short-term plan to be co-constructed with school leaders by the end of the summer term 2021. Define 'high performing'. Does it mean children who are academically able? Do they have to be academically behind and already at breaking point? Figure 5: Current and Proposed ARP by Cluster Arnold Academy ASD provision were forced to Why are no upper school ASD places being added to increase their numbers to 8 in September 2020. Harlington so that children can progress with their peers? Is 8 the permanent number of places or are CBC aiming to reduce it back to 6? 8 Why only 8 Isthis Is this enough enough for the for mostthe most highly highly populated townpopulated town in Central Beds? in Central Beds? primary ASD places, when there are 12 secondary and there is an assumption that Why no secondary SEMH places? more secondary There will be children who aren't suited to Oakbank and need access to mainstream places are needed? from a secondary SEMH ARP. 40. Importantly, in addition to providing more places the proposed model above improves pupil progression pathways, enabling more pupils who require the support offered in ARPs to be able to transfer between primary and secondary schools with their peers. Why only 8 primary places when there are 12 secondary places in both Dunstable/Houghton and Shefford/Stofold? A brand new secondary school is opening in Houghton Regis - the perfect opportunity for an ARP. Where will the 8 primary school ASD ARP places be if Ardley Hill is closing and how soon will the Ardley places be replaced? Are the places at the Sandy Secondary School football academy included here? In March 2020 49 parents indicated that their children needed ASD provision places on a survey that we ran. At this point the Action Group didn’t have many followers, so this is the tip of the iceberg. 32 new places will barely bridge the gap we have NOW. By 2023 the shortage of ASD ARPs will be just as bad, if not worse. With most of the special school plans not coming to fruition for another 4-5 years, EXACTLY how are CBC going to reduce pressure on special schools? Will this involve keeping children in settings that can't meet their needs or sending them out of county? Will it involve increasing barriers to EHC needs assessments, as has been the case for many years? Special Schools 41. A proposed plan for providing additional places at Special Schools is outlined below. In addition, work is also underway with the four Special School head teachers to address the need to reduce immediate pressure on Special School places. 42. Ivel Valley and Chiltern will be provided with additional provision, as will Oak Bank in the short term. Long Term proposals from 2023 School Designation Age range Places Proposal(a) Chiltern • Autism Spectrum 3-19 300 Proposed Disorder (ASD) Unchanged + 75 Places reprovision to new • Moderate Learning site in the Difficulties (MLD) Dunstable/Houghton • Severe Learning Regis cluster Difficulties (SLD) • Profound Multiple Learning Difficulties (PMLD) Unchanged Ivel Valley • MLD 3-19 300 Proposed relocation • SLD Unchanged + 100 places to new site in the • PMLD Biggleswade cluster • ASD + 1 ASD Designation Oak Bank • Social Emotional 7-19 (one site 75-80 (down Proposed remains (1) Mental Health for 7-14 and from circa 115) on existing site (SEMH) one for 14-19) - 40-35 places • ASD + 2 Years + ASD Designation Oak Bank • SEMH 75-80 (new) Proposed expansion (2) - New • ASD + 75–80 onto second site in Free School New Site places the Shefford and + ASD Designation Stotfold cluster. + SEMH Designation Weatherfield • MLD 7-19 200 Proposed relocation • ASD Unchanged + 50 places to new site in the • Speech Language Dunstable and Communication Need Houghton Regis (SLCN) cluster. + ASD Designation • + SLCN Designation (a) Where relocation is proposed, this is because the current site cannot accommodate the forecasted numbers. - Some parents are questioning whether an SEMH school like Oakbank is the right setting for any child with ASD. It is important that these two areas of need are not conflated. - These special schools are all very good at what they do. How will CBC ensure that they are able to expand their areas of expertise to accommodate these new designations and ensure that there isn't a detrimental affect on the provision they already deliver? - It is vital to know the size of these ASD designations and the criteria for entry (e.g. academically able or not), so that it is possible to decide whether enough ASD ARP places are available. 43. Chiltern – Proposed reprovision to a new site remaining within the Dunstable and Houghton Regis cluster. There are no proposed changes to designation or age range. This change is proposed to be completed by 2026. 44. Ivel Valley – Proposed relocation in the Biggleswade area with ASD included within its designation and with an additional 100 places. There is no proposal to change the age range of this school. This change is proposed to be completed by 2023. 45. Oak Bank – Proposal to create a new school run by Oak Bank in addition to the existing school to increase the total places across both sites to 160. The designation for both sites is proposed to include ASD and SEMH on the additional site and the age range will change to cater for children and young people aged 7-19 years. Oak Bank School is in Leighton and Linslade and a new site identified in partnership with the school is likely to be located in the Shefford & Stotfold cluster. This change is proposed to be completed by 2025. 46. Weatherfield – The proposal is to relocate Weatherfield close to the existing site, which will allow the required expansion within the Dunstable and Houghton Regis cluster, with an additional 50 places and the inclusion of ASD and SLCN into the designation. This change is proposed to be completed by 2026. 47. Our proposed plan increases places from 700 to around 950 through growth at each Special School. It increases ASD provision across all clusters, SEMH provision in Leighton Buzzard and SLCN provision in Dunstable. Interdependencies 48. There are a number of interdependencies between the proposed plans detailed in this paper and wider aspects of the programme, including: • Re-providing Maythorn Children’s Home; • Plans for Ivel Valley and Maythorn are interdependent on plans for the mainstream Biggleswade cluster as part of the Housing Infrastructure Fund Bid; • Work relating to the Academy of Central Bedfordshire (ACB) and inclusion forecast work. 49. During the Have Your Say consultation there will continue to be: • Further discussion with ARPs about size of the provision and resources required to ensure that ARPs are able to make the most effective use of resources to maximise pupil progress. • Targeted discussions with existing ARPs about their future provision and with schools who express an interest in establishing an ARP in the future. Have Your Say Proposal 50. The next stage in the process is to hold a Have Your Say consultation. Through this consultation we will seek feedback on our current proposals with regards to SEND provision. 51. Parent and child/young person feedback will be sought through the Have Your Say consultation. SNAP PCF have been part of the internal council working groups and have agreed to support the Local Authority to obtain parent feedback through parent panels which will run alongside the have your say consultation. Additionally, child and young person feedback will be sought through the school feedback channels alongside the Have Your Say consultation. 52. Feedback from our school community is being sought through the Partnership Vision for Education board, the school clusters and from individual schools. What are we consulting on? 53. The questions in the Have Your Say consultation will focus on the 3 main areas in the continuum of need for children with SEND: • Mainstream o Supporting schools with a physical space for multi-agency working SEND support o Developing a comprehensive Special School Outreach programme to support mainstream schools educating children with SEND, to be co constructed with the Special Schools o Co construct pathways into SEND support and early help services with schools • Additional Resource Provision o The additional places in the areas set out in this paper o The increase of places in existing provision set out in this paper • Special School Provision o The additional places in the Special Schools as set out in this paper o The relocation of the Special Schools as set out in this paper Required processes after the Have Your Say consultation 54. Following the Have Your Say consultation the next steps in terms of school organisation processes would be: • For the establishment of new ARPs or expansion of current ARPs, or any interim expansions of Special Schools prior to the permanent expansions outlined in this paper, an additional Have Your Say consultation would be required that included details of specific schools. This would then be followed by the decision-making processes set out below. • The decision-making process varies based upon the type of school: o For Local Authority maintained schools, the proposer (which would be the Local Authority) is required to publish a statutory proposal for consultation. The list of prescribed alterations includes a change of age range, transfer to a new site and the enlargement of premises as well as the addition or expansion of designated provision for children with SEND. Regulations set out the statutory process that must be followed and require that the Local Authority determines the statutory notice within two months of the representation period ending. This process would apply to Chiltern and Ivel Valley Special Schools and to maintained schools in relation to ARPs. o For academy schools the academy trust is required to apply to the Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC, on behalf of the Secretary of State) for permission to make changes. This process would apply to Oak Bank and Weatherfield Special Schools and to academies in relation to ARPs. Council priorities 55. This report supports Central Bedfordshire 2050 Vision, for Central Bedfordshire to ‘continue to be a great place to live and work’ with an education system that is truly inclusive, closes the skills gap, helps our young people into a great jobs and supports our older generations in lifelong learning. Corporate Implications 56. No corporate implications have been identified other than those already listed. Legal Implications 57. Children and Families Act 2014 places a duty on the Councils to make Joint commissioning arrangements to secure education, health and care provision for children and young people with SEND (Part 3, section 26). 58. Section 14 of the Education Act 1996 places a duty on Councils to secure sufficient primary and secondary school places to provide appropriate education for pupils in its area. S14A of the Education Act 1996 imposes a duty to consider representations about the exercise by local authorities of their functions from the parents of qualifying children in relation to the provision of primary and secondary education. Qualifying children include all those of compulsory school age or under. 59. The Education and Inspections Act 2006 gives Councils a strategic role as commissioners of school places and includes duties to consider parental representation, diversity and choice, duties in relation to high standards and the fulfilment of every child’s educational potential and fair access to educational opportunity. 60. The main legislation governing school organisation of schools maintained by the Local Authority is found in sections 6A-32 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, The School Organisation (Establishment and Discontinuance of Schools) Regulations 2013 and the School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013. 61. This guidance for new school proposals can be viewed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/establishing-a-new-school-free-school- presumption 62. There are statutory obligations to consult and a requirement to comply with the relevant statutory requirements for changes to individual schools. 63. The Executive Member for Families, Education and Children has the delegated power to exercise the Council’s duty to determine proposals to alter the upper and lower age range of pupils in Local Authority maintained schools as prescribed by School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013. The Director of Children’s Services has the delegated authority to be responsible for the administration and planning of the review of organisation of schools within the Council’s area pursuant to the Council’s duties under Section 14 of the Education Act 1996 (‘Functions in respect of provision of primary and secondary school’). 64. The proposer is required to publish statutory notices for a prescribed alteration at a Local Authority maintained school. The representation period is set out in regulations and is for most changes four weeks. The Director of Children’s Services has delegated authority to exercise the Council’s functions relating to the publication of statutory notices for proposed prescribed alterations to schools maintained by the Council in accordance with the relevant provisions of Part 2 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and the School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013 subject to consultation with the Executive Member to take particular account of: such statutory and non-statutory guidance and the key factors for decision makers as might be published from time to time by the Department for Education; the School Admissions Code; and full consideration of the budget implications. At the conclusion of the formal representation period following publication of the relevant statutory notice(s), Executive must consider any responses to the consultation and will thereafter determine the relevant proposal(s) in accordance Part 2 of the 2006 Act and the Prescribed Alterations Regulations. In so doing, the Executive must take particular account of such statutory guidance and the key factors for decision makers as might be published from time to time by the Department for Education. Statutory notices must be determined within two months of the end of the representation period otherwise the proposals are determined by the School Adjudicator. 65. The general principles derived from case law as to how consultations should be conducted, known as the “Gunning principles” are: consultation should occur when proposals are at a formative stage; consultations should give sufficient reasons for any proposal to permit intelligent consideration; consultations should allow adequate time for consideration and response. There must be clear evidence that the decision maker has considered the consultation responses, or a summary of them, before taking its decision. 66. In the Supreme Court case of R (Moseley) v LB Haringey (2014) , the Supreme Court endorsed the Gunning principles and added two further general principles: the degree of specificity regarding the consultation should be influenced by those who are being consulted; and the demands of fairness are likely to be higher when the consultation relates to a decision which is likely to deprive someone of an existing benefit. Financial and Risk Implications 67. The capital costs will be considered as part of the Schools for the Future Capital programme within the Medium-Term Financial Plan. Paragraph 54 outlines the next steps in developing a full set of proposals in conjunction with a wide range of stakeholders, which will be brought to Members for approval when finalised. 68. There is a risk of increased costs arising from transport should this proposal not be implemented. This would be when Special Schools/ ARPs are not spread out around the county as there would be increased cost transporting children between home and school when children live further away. 69. The Schools for the Future programme includes a commitment to meeting the immediate need for special school places, whilst further work is undertaken to finalise the future model of provision needed, building on consultations with all stakeholders. The MTFP represents the Council’s financial contribution to the programme, with other funding sources to be secured through Basic Need Grant and Section 106 contributions, as well as other opportunities presented through Department for Education funded developments, such as Free Schools. The programme will generate capital receipts as an additional funding stream which will support the provision of the additional places required for children and young people with SEND. The draft MTFP includes a budget of £3M for 2021/22 to secure the necessary refurbishments to existing sites at Special Schools and ARPs to meet short to medium term need with an additional £250k to enable work to start on necessary feasibility studies. This will enable work to progress once the consultation process has been concluded. 70. Key risks include: • Failure to comply with legal and statutory duties/guidance leading to any decision being open to challenge in the courts or through the Ombudsman. • Greater reliance on out of county placements for Central Bedfordshire children and young people contravenes the Council’s policy of local school places for local school children. • Failure to deliver the Council's strategic priorities. • The Council failing to forecast accurately future pupil numbers would result in either an over or under provision of places being provided in the future. Equalities Implications 71. Central Bedfordshire Council has a statutory duty to promote equality of opportunity, eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and foster good relations in respect of nine protected characteristics; age disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. To consider local needs and implications, an Equality Impact Assessment is being carried out in respect of the draft plan. 72. Central Bedfordshire Council has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient school places for children that need them. Age and disability are key considerations in respect of this duty and for the Schools for the Future programme. 73. The decision-making process, which is set out in regulation for proposals to expand Council maintained schools, requires an evaluation, on a ‘project by project’ basis, of any equalities and human rights issues that might arise. 74. The proposal is not envisaged to have an adverse impact on any of the following – sex, gender reassignment, age, disability, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion or belief (or no belief), pregnancy and maternity, human rights and all other groups. Regarding age, children will have access to sufficient school places. Sustainability Implications 75. Central Bedfordshire Council has an adopted Sustainability Plan which focuses on how the Council can improve its own operations and processes, led by example in buildings we are responsible for, facilitate investments in infrastructure-led projects and influence, support and enable residents and local businesses to adopt sustainable behaviours and practices. 76. The Schools for the Future programme will look to ensure that sustainability is embedded in all new schools and extensions delivered. It is the intention of the programme to ensure that any Council-led and commissioned capital building projects embrace sustainability, are energy efficient, low carbon, and economically viable, based on a sound business case and robust whole-life-costing. In doing so, the Council will lead by example for developers in the area. 77. Wherever possible, this will include: i. Low-carbon design for new schools and extensions ii. Ensuring design embeds circular economy principles and water sensitivity iii. Maximisation of energy efficiency iv. Consideration for on-site renewable energy generation v. Minimisation of waste generation, and maximization of green and blue infrastructure including their future maintenance. 78. All schools involved in the Schools for the Future programme will be required to develop a School Travel Plan to actively encourage sustainable travel for journeys to and from school and any educational or recreational journeys organised by the school. This will also help to mitigate the impact of unsustainable travel modes on the local community. Conclusion and next Steps 79. The information contained within this paper sets out a case for an increase in Special School and Additional Resource Provision places. It is recommended that Executive approve the proposal to commence a Have Your Say consultation on this proposed Plan to obtain feedback from a wider range of partners, children, young people and their families. Appendices Appendix A - Understanding future need and capacity - Methodology Background Papers None Report author(s): Sarah Ferguson Deputy Director, Children’s Services [email protected]