My local authority and policy on sen funding...........

[deeeja]

Special Educational Need
There were five specific proposals in respect of SEN the results for which are as set out below: -
(I) Implement the integrated approach to funding for School Action, School Action Plus and existing statements as set out in the Consultation Document.
21 schools agreed with the proposal
5 schools disagreed with the proposal
46 schools did not respond
(ii) Delegate resources for statements below 18 hours of support per week.
18 schools agreed with the consultation
10 schools disagreed with the consultation
44 schools did not respond

(iii) Implement the revised funding formula for SEN from April 2008.
11 schools agreed with the consultation
15 schools disagreed with the consultation
46 schools did not respond
(iv) Operate transition arrangements for the implementation of the revised SEN funding formula over a three-year period.
21 schools agreed with the consultation
6 schools disagreed with the consultation
45 schools did not respond
(v) Allocate targeted resources for SEN and Personalisation using the formula set out in the Consultation Document.
16 schools agreed with the consultation
10 schools disagreed with the consultation
46 schools did not respond
From the schools responding to the consultation, a majority were in favour of each of the proposals in respect SEN. The exception being the implementation of the formula methodology being proposed in the consultation document.
There are three key issues, which emerged from the consultation on this issue: -
(I) Use of the Acorn data and specifically the application of category 5 ?Hard Pressed? only within the funding formula.
Particular concerns expressed related to the impact for a number of schools with higher levels of free school meals eligibility. To address these concerns, officers have reviewed the opportunity for the inclusion of Acorn Category 4 ? moderate means ? factors as part of the formula. This reflects Post Industrial Families, Blue Collar Roots and Asian Communities. Previous analysis by officers has highlighted that the implementation of factors four and five have resulted in significant budget changes for schools.
As such, officers have looked to include the impact of above average need in the inclusion of category four. In doing so, officers have applied the 22.5% Acorn funding 2/3 for Acorn Five and 1/3 for Acorn Four (above average need). The impact of this is to smooth some of the volatility in transition to the new formula. Although the inclusion of the new Personalised Learning resource through this formula will mean that no schools will lose.
The DCSF has recently published raw Family Tax Credit data and officers have compared the impact of the application of this data with the proposals currently being considered. While there are variances for some schools there are clear similarities in the impact for schools of using different these different approaches.
(ii) Use of Key Stage One results in respect of Infant pupils
This approach was criticised at the workshops and in the responses to the consultation because it does not reflect prior attainment. It is therefore proposed that the Foundation Stage Profile data should be used for infant aged pupils.
(iii) Adequacy of resources
The analysis in the consultation document represents a fixed point in time ands such does not reflect the funding positioning schools for 2008/09. The application of the £1.98 million Personalisation resource will result in all schools having an increase in funding, a further £1.4 million and £2.4 million respectively will be targeted to schools in 2009/10 and 2010/11. This is a total additional allocation of £5.6 million over the three-year funding period.
In addition to the Personalisation there are proposals to increase the SEN funding to reflect additional need, which would previously have been allocated through Annex K. Such additional need will be confirmed through the monitoring arrangements which will be introduced by the Children?s Trust including the roll out of the costing module of Provision Mapping.
DSG proposals also reflect the impact of SEN review with the increase in funding in respect of the SEN review in 2009/10 and 2010/11.
It is therefore proposed that the formula commence in 2008/09, but is revised to reflect the inclusion of above average need in Category Four and the use of the Foundation Stage profile for infant pupils. For consistency, this approach will also be applied in the allocation of the Personalisation monies.
School?s Forum agreed at their meeting that they would like to receive a report in September/October 2008 to enable them to consider the impact of the changes proposed.
The amended allocations to schools based on the revised use of Acorn data and Foundation Stage profiles for infant aged pupils were issued to all schools on 6 February 2008.
Children?s Trust ? SEN Consultation
Simultaneously, the Children?s Trust has been running a consultation on the SEN focussing specifically on the principles relating to changes in approach to SEN. This is the start of a dialogue with stakeholders regarding SEN, but Forum agreed to consider the initial feedback from this consultation. This consultation posed three questions.
? Existing Statements will continue as they are. Do you agree with the principle of providing schools with more flexibility in funding for SEN so that not so many children will need statements in future?
? Do you agree with the principle that the CSA should expect schools to develop their special educational provision as described in the consultation?
? Do you agree with the principles of the proposed monitoring arrangements?

Twenty-two schools responded to this consultation and there was almost inevitably some overlap in the comments received from schools. Responses were generally supportive although concerns were raised in line with the comments above and more specifically regarding the impact of the changes on schools and the operation of the monitoring arrangements.
Fixing of Formula Factors
For the 2006/08 multi year period Schools Forum agreed that the data used for a number of non-AWPU factors be frozen in the second year of the period to assist schools in projecting their future budget share.
Through reviewing this process during 2007/08 it was found that there was a relatively even split in the number of schools who benefited financially from freezing the data and those who were disadvantaged. For this reason, as part of the Schools Funding Formula consultation for 2008/11, schools have been asked whether or not they would again like to freeze the non-AWPU data. The numbers of those for and the number of those against is suggestion are extremely close: -
Fix 13
Un fix 17
It is therefore proposed that no formula factors should be fixed for the multi year budget period.

From a letter sent out to HTs

[deeeja]

Wow, sorry for mammouth essay post, but so shocked by it, and haven't really digested it properly yet, but surely this is illegal, isn't it?
Also my clinical psychologist has been told that it is not necessary to give diagnosis of asd because this will not affect statements.

I think I have done something naughty psting the above, but no-one has told me it is confidential.
OOOPS!

[Candlewax]

Which county are you in deeeja?

[deeeja]

Hi Candlewax, I am in Redbridge!
My local borough are trying to phase out statements over the next three years, one of the methods utilised in this is under-diagnosis. Also, I was strongly discouraged from starting the statement process myself, ofcourse I did, and the manager from the local cdc rang me personally to accuse me of 'not trusting' them . Alot of friends I have made there have been told to leave the statementing up to the staff of the cdc, one friend with a deaf son, has almost been persuaded that her son is doing well with a hearing aid, when in reality he can only hear when his mother shouts.
Everyone with asd related problems are being told to wait until next year, and this year all children with asd are said to have social communication disorders.
The child development centre works for the LA, even the clinical psychologist takes instructions from the LEA.
They are devious, to put it nicely, and the staff have started telling other mothers there that I am a liar. How stupid, what do I have to gain?
I think my borough is one of the worst!

[Candlewax]

Wow! I think I agree about them being one of the worst!!! What they are doing is totally and utterly illegal. I hope someone finds out what they are doing and wipes the floor with them.

Gosh deeeja, that is awful that they are branding you a liar. They just do not want "informed" parents do they! They know that if a parent is informed, it will cost them money because they will have to follow the law and provide what a child needs.

The educational system stinks. And that is from a parent who for the second time is trying to get her ds a statement but this time, the LEA better watch out because "NO" is not an option!

[TheMatrix]

Hi

I work for an INDEPENDENT charity supporting parents and carers to get the SEN that the child needs. I have just joined MumsNet and I am impressed with the understanding (of the corrupt system) and the determination (not to take NO for an answer)! LEA's/schools all rely on the fact that parents are not aware of their legal rights and b#llsh#t them with so many platitudes.
For what it is worth, my advice is to:

? Get the free publication 'SEN Code of Practice' from 0845-6022260 and read it;
? Treat LEA/school staff/Parent Partnership as all on one side which is NOT your side! (despite all the 'support' you may seem to get) and don?t say anything that you are not happy to be quoted ? they share information despite 'in confidence';
? Parent Partnership are NOT independent ? they are paid by the LEA!
? Treat all LEA/NHS assessments as very superficial;
? Pay for independent assessments (yes, it is easy to say, but how much do you really want a good statement that WILL help your child??)
? Never go to a meeting alone ? take someone who can take copious notes leaving you free to think and talk (surprising how better mannered the ?authorities? are when they think they may be quoted!!).
? All the above is very sad, but a fact ? money rules and all decisions made revolve around it - not your child?s needs.

I hope the above may be of use to some members.

Keep fighting!