SEN funding isn't a bottomless money pit

[Sogfree]

I'll preface this by saying I really enjoy my job working in a SEN school. I care deeply for the children and families I work with.

I've had 4 different conversations this week with parents where they expect an excessive amount of additional resource to be allocated to their child. They expect this as, in their opinion, it's needed. I disagree with 3 of the 4 parents that this is needed.

All 4 of the parents are going to fight the decisions county have made. Their decision to fight will mean county spend more money arguing the challenge.

Services are already broken with the increase in need. Recruitment fails, as there aren't enough speech therapists/OTs/CAMHS practitioners etc to employ.

One parent demanding extra from one of these services means another child gets less.

One parent demanding a child goes to school X at £100k per year when a place at school Y at £30k is going to meet their needs means the child who needs the place at school X doesn't get it, and extra £70k per year is wasted. And the parent keeps their child out of school for 12-18 months whilst they fight for the place at school X.

That's the reality.

Every parent wants the world for their child. I understand that. But taxpayers can't afford to give every child the world.

AIBU - parents know their child best and we should fund what the parents say the child needs

YANBU - there's only so much money to go around and parents need to accept hard decisions have to be made without challenging them

Tax payers can't afford it, that's the point.

MS like everybody else and the money being siphoned off for a few needs to be pumped back into MS. Good provision needs to be modelled and copied.

This is a genuine question.

How do you know what the needs are if the system blocks you from assessment at every turn?

"Your child doesn't listen" could mean "your child is deaf" and "your child refuses to come into the classroom" could mean "your child is autistic and hugely bothered by the noise/lights/smell/chairs".

Yet we can afford a massive nuclear system

No, you need evidence. That's how courts work. You can argue and prepare all you want, it means FA without the evidence to back up what you're saying. The LA can appeal if they believe there's been an error in law, they rarely do because there rarely is.

Theres case law to say CYP can't have a rolls Royce education. The courts cannot award above what is necessary.

The whole 'parents make unreasonable demands and just get they want' trope is boring, inaccurate and untrue.

What makes you think you know better than a judge and expert panel who actually know and apply the law?

Cheaper interventions that widen access for more children need to be looked at. It’s ridiculous to insist only horse riding and music lessons will
do.

We are talking about parents wanting the minimum. Their child at a school and receiving education.

To give an example of another child we know who was self harming in school in the toilets. She was autistic. The ms secondary couldn’t keep her safe and she was asked to leave on that basis. She has now been placed in a specialist school and is making educational progress.

@HMart1n and when state MS isn’t appropriate?

There are hoards of children like that. We can’t afford specialist schools for all.

@HMart1n if provision could be provided cheaper, it would be.

Why can’t we?

If we have hoards of children needing a similar provision then surely the cost effective route would be to look at creating that provision.

Why do we keep trying to fit square pegs into round holes rather than reshaping the holes?

The difference between Dan Moynihan's and Keir Starmer's salaries for one year would pay for 8 children like mine to have their EHCPs funded throughout their entire secondary school careers.

There is a bottomless pit for academy CEOs!

It can always be adjusted, supported and improved and will need to be as the money simply isn’t there for every child to have a bespoke private education.

I think the "needs" framing is disguising a core issue, which is what do you do if there isn't money to do the thing that is needed?

While I'm sure such examples exist, I don't think the SEN sector is rife with children being given free pony riding lessons.

Probably much more common is the kid who finally got a place in a special school an hour away (requiring 2x daily taxis) and now able to roughly access a similar level of education as a "normal" kid. Not extravagance as such (but costing tens of thousands a year nonetheless).

Someone mentioned how much we spend on the NHS: Someone with a cancer diagnosis with a 10% chance of recovery if £10M is spent on their care "needs" the treatment, and it would simply restore them to a normal life not a luxurious one - that doesn't necessarily mean the state will/should provide it, nor that it's not a luxury at a societal level to consider spending those amounts, nor that the decision to do so is immune from criticism.

The issue with needs framing is that complex needs require exponentially more funding, not just a bit more. And statutory requirements to "always meet needs" will fundamentally always run against this wall.

You'll probably find it's often cheaper for LAs to fund private than a specialist place.

Another child we know was scoring well on cognitive testing but at least two years behind in many areas at KS2, partially deaf, had autism and ADHD and had not one single friend in ms. Unsurprisingly that child had significant mental health needs.

That child has been awarded a specialist setting by the tribunal. I don’t think anyone who knows them thinks this isn’t a wise outcome.

They will hopefully manage to get well mentally and be able to socialise with similar children and hopefully get some qualifications and a job.

You'd get better economies of scale too instead of all this piecemeal provision, and build staff expertise.

It’s not cost effective. Far better to improve MS and extend provision within MS schools. Funnily enough some parents don’t want that- just a private education funded for them. 🤔

@HMart1n it is cheaper to fund education now than prison, unemployment benefits and mental health care later.

I am all for cheaper interventions that more children can access and I'm not sure I've insisted only those interventions will do? I've given examples of why they aren't just hobbies.

I have actually just suggested that they are actually often the cheaper interventions that more children can access when compared to the specialist OT and physio they replace.

@HMart1n thankfully, every child doesn’t need an independent education.

State MS can’t always be adjusted to the point where it is suitable. Not all DC can be supported in state MS regardless of how much you improved it.

If you have 2 children with (let’s say) the same requirements, but one is from a materially disadvantaged background and the other is more comfortable, if there is one appropriate space which child should get it? There is an argument to be made for tossing a coin, an argument for offering the poorer child the place because the richer child’s family may be able to fund some mitigations, an argument for offering it to whoever lives closer; and yet the likelihood is that in many LAs, the place will go to the child whose parents have the resources (material, emotional, intellectual, educational) to make their case and take the fight further. In many cases that will be the wealthier family.

@HMart1n what you are overlooking is that ms schools won’t accept the “hordes” of dc like that. Where are you expecting them to go? Self harming autistic children injuring themselves on school premises?

Do you want your "normal" child missing chunks of every lesson while staff provide first aid and your child not being able to go to the toilet?

I'm not exaggerating for effect. This is the actual situation in my moderately well resourced and relatively good on SEN comp.

There will always be children who fall into that gap between mainstream and specialist at the moment. It’s not about wanting private it’s about wanting a setting which can meet the child’s needs.

you can’t just “improve mainstream” and suddenly make it suitable for all children with SEN. Needs are too varied for that and schools vary too much.