The High Needs Block System of SEND Funding is Failing The Children it’s Meant to Help
Paul Silvester makes the case for why the country’s recently overhauled system of SEND funding is failing those it’s supposed to help…
The unseen crisis in SEND isn’t just about money. It’s about leadership. When announcing recently that £25 million will be spent on government contracts to provide SEND-related parental information, participation and partnering services, Nadhim Zahawi, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Children and Families said that he wanted, “Every child to have the support they need to unlock their potential.”
That sentiment is welcome, but what many children and families need concerns appropriate funding, a suitable placement or even just a means of holding others to account. As such, this support seems to be something of a sticking plaster – in many LA areas, the deficit in the High Needs Block amounts to half as much as the cost of the announcements made. It’s a deflection.
The new national funding formula for schools, high needs and the central school services block was introduced in April this year, and I believe it’s already failed. There’s no grasp of the structural problems with funding special needs education. The system seems designed to encourage all parties to fight with each other, there’s no role for the regional school commissioners and no leadership from government.
As schools, LAs and parents square up to each other, the root causes of the problems we’re facing – lack of central direction and control, inadequate funding – go ignored. We want to ensure that the most vulnerable children in our communities have opportunities to thrive, rather than simply exist; to contribute to society instead of relying on benefits.
Before being appointed headteacher of a 2-19 special school, I used to work at a local authority. While there, I once came across a demand to continue with provision for a child in the independent sector that cost £245,000 a year. The child in question was a 9-year-old with complex needs who had just been placed in residential provision by another LA many miles away. The mother was newly arrived in the area, and we were now responsible for picking up the tab.
I had spent the previous 12 months working flat out with parents and providers to reduce the out of area budget, so that the needs of mainstream pupils could be met through appropriate funding. Just two weeks before the aforementioned parent contacted our LA, I’d been able to inform the Director of Children’s Services that I’d managed to save the £1 million required for additional funds to be transferred to the mainstream primary budget.
It’s cases like this that make me wonder how central government can expect the High Needs Block, where funds are so precarious, to be used for expensive placement. In this instance, viable alternatives weren’t even considered. We had a situation where the arrival of one additional pupil represented 10% of a special school’s annual budget.
Tough nut to crack
In May this year, a survey from the County Councils Network found that just under £200m was overspent by county councils on the High Needs Block over three years. It’s long been evident that what we require is a High Needs Block controlled by a partnership (with a role for central government) to ensure that it’s able to actually meet local needs.
As it is, we have a national system of high needs funding that’s struggling to adequately meet the needs of a rising pupil population, and attracting anger from parents and schools because of those unmet needs.
Given how much energy we’ve seen central government put into reducing regional discrepancies in mainstream education, it’s unfortunate that fair funding for the most vulnerable has proved a tougher nut to crack. Between neighbouring LAs, funding for mainstream, special or alternative SEND provision for equivalent ages and types of need can vary by as much as 50%, and sometimes even more.
If working out needs is so difficult, then perhaps ‘expected outcomes’ might be a better metric to use as a basis for funding. Outcomes speak universally and positively, while the word ‘needs’ tends to have depressing or negative connotations. If outcomes can be defined and measured in some way, then so too can the support and funding necessary to achieve them.
That way, we can start to reach agreement on those areas where it’s possible to have a common format for supporting outcomes and defining, however loosely, an agreed funding framework to support young people in achieving them.
From Penrith to Portsmouth, from Southampton to South Shields, our children aren’t ‘a diagnosis’. They’re not just points on a spreadsheet. We need to change the focus of the conversation to their future. And we can do that by ensuring that funding is awarded fairly, for delivery of agreed outcomes, while holding professionals properly accountable for their successes or failures in doing so.
To the moon and back
Historically, much of the SEND support schools would receive was based at the LA, which would dispatch specialist support teams out to schools, but the cuts we’ve seen in recent years have scaled back the support available from LAs dramatically.
Despite that, most primary schools I’ve worked with will go to the moon and back to support pupils with special needs. The chief issue many mainstream providers face is that the roll-out of high needs funding has coincided with the adoption of a new high stakes accountability system driven by exam results, which seen has seen a greater focus on child protection, but also a failure of budgets to keep pace.
The culture across both primary and secondary can be seen to have shifted as a result, with many schools now looking to place their most vulnerable pupils somewhere else, instead of being able to provide specialist support and resources themselves. Consequently, yet more pressure is placed onto already strained special schools.
The growth of the academies system has further reduced the workforce available to each LA. Many LA SEND specialists are employed on short-term contracts and dependent on yearly awards of funding from central government. We’ve lost a great deal of expertise at the local level, and with it, years of accumulated knowledge concerning schools, pupils and parents built up over time.
Given a changing population, the reluctance of some academy chains to provide extra resources and out of area provision no longer seen as being desirable, the High Needs Block has necessarily been refreshed, but not properly reviewed. In essence, the High Needs Block as it currently stands is equivalent to planning a holiday based on a decade-old map, years-old TripAdvisor reviews and a budget based on 2008 prices.
A better system
For schools, LAs, parents and both current and future pupils, the High Needs Block isn’t fit for purpose. I believe it’s unfair to expect LAs alone to fund placements in the case of specialised and costly residential provision, but LAs are often up against it where those kind of negotiations are concerned. The numbers involved are small and the pressure to find placements high, often under considerable time pressures.
We need a better system. There must be scope for LAs to work alongside parents and providers when commissioning new provision, and funding should be based on delivering quality outcomes, rather than a postcode lottery. Central government could set out a framework of funding, as they’re currently doing for the mainstream sector. We can make it so that a pupil’s funding isn’t dependent on the rhetorical skills of their parents.
If Ofsted can keep a close eye on the impact of Pupil Premium, then it can surely examine the outcomes set out in EHCPs. This would give schools a powerful incentive to track the successes of their most vulnerable pupils. Above all, we need leadership from central government and faith in the wider SEND system. What we need aren’t times tables, but times of fairness. We can do better than this.
What can I do?
As practitioners, we need to advocate, but above all the system needs to work together. Here’s how we can do that:
- If you’re in a mainstream school, link up with your nearest special school or alternative provision setting. Try and facilitate meet ups between pupils of different settings and foster an inclusive culture.
- Find out what’s in your LA’s Local Offer and check to see what’s missing. Is there anything you can provide, or some local initiative you can be part of? If so, do it!
- Attend some local events alongside parents groups; try to break down the barriers and view things from a range of perspectives.
- See if there are any links for pupils with SEND you can establish with local businesses, fundraising events or community initiatives and share them with others.
Paul Silvester is the Headteacher at Newman Community Special School in Rotherham.
