The problem with SEND funding
Amid promises of government cash, will schools and LAs now be able to to cover the costs of their SEND provision, asks Sue Birchall…
- by Sue Birchall
The news that central government is planning to inject an additional £700 million into funding our students with SEND will no doubt be gratefully received by education professionals at all levels.
Since the SEND reforms of 2014, education health and care plans have been used to ensure that students are able to access high needs funding and the support that they need.
Until 2015, the proportion of pupils recognised having SEND who also had a Statement or EHCP remained stable at around 2.7%. As of January 2019, this figure had risen to 3.1% – a noticeable rise that’s expected to increase further still, which will of course apply even more pressure on LA budgets.
So whilst the extra funding is welcome, the question we have to ask at this stage is whether it’s going to be enough.
Huge strain
The obvious response to that is, when is there ever enough? Existing regulations give parents choice as to how their student’s educational needs should be met, which inevitably places a huge strain on education budgets.
There might have been some additional funds awarded to LAs, but this has barely even scratched the surface of the problem.
By April 2019, the combined deficit for LAs stood at circa £300 million – a figure that’s set to increase even further. As a member of our county school funding forum, I’ve been party to discussions concerning the high needs funding block and how unsustainable it currently is.
LAs have had to make some difficult decisions around the HNF, often dipping into the designated schools block for extra financial support in order to help ‘balance the books’.
So while that £700 million announcement will have been broadly welcomed, it will perhaps have been tempered by a degree of dismay that it’s intended as a one-year increase only.
There may, however, be a mitigating factor in that additional money going into schools block could potentially include a further SEND allocation within it.
Volatile forecasting
For special schools and specialist resource provisions, there may be some relief from the announcement. Given the way that Place Plus is funded, it would require an increase in the basic levels of Element 1 and 2 to provide any secure income boost.
Special schools and specialist resource provisions will both include a number of places commissioned by their LAs, thus providing operating revenue for the setting. There is, however, a significant difference between the two when it comes to the risks involved with managing places.
Special schools will receive Place Plus funding for their commissioned places, but will often include a cohort that have extreme and complex needs. Any high needs funding they receive will accompany the admission of each student to whom that applies via their EHCP and assessment of need.
This can often increase demand for staff support and specialist resources, some of which the school may already have. The issue for the school is that while Place Plus funding stays in place, HNF will travel with students to wherever they end up going. Without careful planning, this can result in overstaffing or excessive resourcing.
Forecasting a special school’s budgetary requirements therefore becomes challenging due to the volatile nature of the funding involved and the school’s fulfilment of places.
Monthly monitoring and forecasting becomes essential, with special school leaders having to ensure that any decisions they make give due consideration to what can be a highly unpredictable budget situation.
Mainstream schools will be used to making educated estimates of their future student numbers, but for special schools, the key concern is less to do with overall pupil numbers and far more with what the particular nature of those pupils’ needs might be.
Not only that, but a typical special school will be facing a huge demand for places that they may or may not be able to cater for.
Holistic advantages
The outlook is slightly different for special resource provisions (SRPs). These receive the same Place Plus funding per student place as special schools, and will similarly have a set number of their places regularly commissioned by their LA, via funding that should be secure for at least a year.
HNF will again travel with students, but the financial risk this presents to SRPs will be fairly low, since most will offer a fairly small provision in relation to their overall cohort.
There are exceptions, of course. The school I currently support has the largest SRP in the county and one of the largest in the country.
It currently offers 120 places for pupils with everything from speech and language needs to severe physical disabilities.
We’ve found that there are numerous holistic advantages to having an SRP as part of our school. We follow a policy of integration that extends far beyond having students share the same curriculum, classrooms and resources.
Aside from the obvious benefits that come with designing a school around principles of inclusion, the integration we encourage also helps mitigate some of the financial pressures and concerns that we face.
As a PFI school, the Place Plus system works very well for us. We don’t have the ability to make savings on our core operational processes, simply because we have no control over them.
Consequently, the system gives us certain guarantees and assurances that at least some of our income will be consistent. This doesn’t come without a cost of course; the provision currently has an excellent reputation, which it needs to keep in order to ensure full cohorts in the years ahead.
Bird’s-eye-view
Our ability to share staffing between both elements of our very busy school is extremely useful, and a constant consideration when it comes to our curriculum planning.
Similar to a special school, the percentage spend of our budget on staffing is higher due to the needs of our students, allowing us to be a little more dynamic with our delivery.
Indeed, we’ve found that having an SRP that has oversight of our SEND provision has been an extremely supportive and positive model.
I make sure that I’m fully aware of all aspects regarding the SRP, so that my own level of oversight is equivalent to that of someone in my position at a special school.
This ‘bird’s-eye view’, seen through a business-focused lens, feeds into all decisions taken within the provision and ensures they all have a financial dimension.
Budgets can be spent quickly but making savings takes far longer, which is why having a dynamic and proactive SBM in such settings is so vital.
So, is that extra funding going to be enough? Well, if the amount proposed successfully makes its way into our schools, then the pressures I describe here could be greatly reduced – though the precise impact will differ, depending on its use.
It could be that those additional funds go some way towards making up the shortfalls currently being experienced by a number of LAs.
If that’s where they end up, then expect to see little or no benefits at an operational level; we’ll simply continue to face the same pressures. That said, there’s another side to consider in that cuts to high needs funding won’t be as severe – something that would likely benefit all schools.
Perhaps what’s really needed is a fundamental reform of the whole system…
Need to know
- Audit your school’s level of required SEND provision in consultation with your SENCo. This might include examining census returns and recording any high needs funding awarded to specific pupils.
- Stay ahead of the game by monitoring the minutes of your local Schools Forum meetings. All HNF decisions will be approved here, so make sure you’re ready in the event of any changes.
- Have your SENCo regularly brief SLT on any HNF-related developments, and keep them updated on the school’s access to additional financial support.
- Engage with any national or local SEND-related government consultations, taking input from leaders, SBMs and SENCos.
- Share best practice, advice and guidance through, for example, your nearest school business professional network or nasen’s Advisory Groups
Sue Birchall is a consultant, speaker, writer, trainer and business
