SEND - children’s needs to be reassessed from year 6 2029?

I’m not engaging with the emotional blackmail any more. I’m here to discuss a new policy which has been announced today.

I wouldn’t put it past them.

I’d be interested to see a projection of costs. The new ISPs will be legally enforced, but presumably the support will be more generic. The white paper also says:

independent special schools will be brought under a new regulatory regime to make sure they deliver the high-quality support set out in packages to a fair and reasonable price

So it looks like they’ll be legislating on how much they can charge and for what (at LAST!). I think this one will actually make the biggest difference.

I think this is a hint that only medical physical disability and severe learning difficulties will be entitled to specialist provision:

draft packages will be published later this year and designed with independent experts and parents, guiding provision in specialist places in mainstream and special schools – for example physical disability requiring personal care assistance or severe learning difficulty

its not especially relevant to the white paper and the consultation under discussion in that the government has already said that send will be centrally funded from 2028 so its not from general council funds.

I have no doubt they want to ensure costs don't spiral and money is well spent and thats a driver for change. Believe it or not, id like a better cheaper send system too!

but I cant even work out if you are pro the proposals because you believe they will reduce costs, or if you are against them because it doesnt go far enough and which bits you like or dont like.

Just that you think its all too expensive now.

The government has said it plans to invest an extra £4bn in children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in England over the next three years, including funding for schools and more specialist teachers.

It’s getting boring now.

Smears and insults just won’t work any more.

Let’s see how much of it makes it into law. A screeching U-turn would not exactly be unprecedented from these clowns, what with those pesky backbenchers expecting a Labour government to do socialist stuff like supporting disabled children to have an education.

It is reducing as the legal obligations are being reduced. That’s literally what has happened today.

I’m not happy about the spirally, endless rise in costs, the impact it’s having on the functioning of council duties, not to mention the fact it isn’t producing any satisfactory results, no. Are you happy with it?

Pretty similar to services for older people. Good use of money. It won’t be reducing any time soon as parents with children who don’t have SEN don’t want their kids impacted by a lack of provision. Everybody also knows that poor SEND provision ends up costing the tax payer more in the long run.

You can fake nonchalance but 38% is staggeringly high given the majority of it will go on SEN. It’s too high.

What about it?

Its schools and education and covers:-

• Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) services: Funding for support services for children with additional needs.
• School buildings and improvements: Funding capital projects, such as building new schools or repairing existing facilities.
• School transport: Funding transport services for children getting to school.
• Children and young people's services:Supporting youth services and child protection.
• General Education Administration: Supporting local authority education administration.

You likely didn’t have to do that, I’d imagine 29miles would have qualified for transport.

Is nobody going to comment on this?

Mine aren’t at school anymore
I have three
One with Autism and adhd

Their school that suited all their needs, including his was 29 miles away.
Both dh and I work as Architects and took them to school, picked them up and carried on with our day jobs

Not all children offered transport need adapted vehicles

I was also referring to a pp that stated perhaps the parent is a carer….being a carer doesn’t in fact mean an automatic right to council funded taxis.

I’m sure you do, but your child isn’t disabled - I assume.

That means you don’t need adapted transport, you may well be able to walk there, your child probably doesn’t go to school 20 miles away because the nearest suitable school wasn’t in your LA - or even the next one, you don’t need multiple adults to get one child to school…. etc.

FFS, I know a child who gets a taxi to a quite local school, she is blind! It is not safe for her to walk there.

"Does anything in the white paper or send consultation reference a change to transport qualification criteria though? "

It doesn't say anything.
Some posters are just desperate to say that this, this and this will be stopping when the white paper says nothing about it.

"ive known of taxis used to transport children just over a mile, with parent not working."

I know someone who had that. The family didn't have a car and the child couldn't walk.

Does anything in the white paper or send consultation reference a change to transport qualification criteria though? Its long so im still going through it.

Remember, they are targeting ehcps to reduce to current levels of 5% by 2035 after a predicted increase for a few more years.

So in my hopeful view local inclusion hubs might reduce need for taxis which it does says in the paper where I've got so far.

But now you are saying they wont as people get them to go a mile. So why is this proposal saving taxi costs or did you just want to moan about taxi costs.

Surely if they aren’t working because they are a carer
then part of that is getting their kid to school

No one does part of my job for me. I do it all.

Oh look, two more insults to add to the list. Aggressive, blackmailing, demanding, sharp-elbowed, unreasonable, hysterical, lazy, weak, after golden tickets/gold-plated provision/the best education… and on and on.

Whether a parent works or not isn’t part of the legislation around transport.

Transport for DC attending a school a mile away would be because the child’sSEN &/or disability means they cannot reasonably be expected to walk &/or there isn’t a safe walking route SEN or not.