Webchat with Edward Timpson, children's minister, on the upcoming SEND changes; TUESDAY 15 JULY at 12.15pm

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

As lots of you will know, the Children and Families Act comes into force in September, and with it some changes to the systems around special educational needs.

We know this is a topic many MN posters are deeply involved with. You may remember we've previously had chats about this with Sarah Teather (when she held the relevant government post) and with Edward Timpson himself a while back.

Edward says: 'We've been preparing for the big changes happening in SEND from September. We've been working with local authorities, parents, children, young people and many of our partner organisations in health and education to reform the systems for children with special educational needs and disabilities. I've been looking forward to discussing these changes with you as I know that SEND is a topic of great interest to many Mumsnetters.'

We hope you can join us on the day; as ever, if you can't please post up your questions in advance.

Thanks
MNHQ

@VeraGrant

My question is: Considering the evidence base behind ABA, and the fact that so many other countries now provide ABA as the default treatment/ education for children with autism, does the UK spend vast sums every year A) fighting parents who desperately want ABA B) propping up eclectic provision that has zero evidence to support it?

Wouldn't you consider setting up an independent review (NB independent of the NAS too) to address this issue?

Hi VeraGrant - this is a question a few Mumsnet users have posted. As you will know Applied behaviour Analaysis (or ABA) is one of a number of interventions for children with autism. Parents of children with SEN statements, or EHC Plans in the future, have the right to ask for ABA to be provided at home or at one of the schools which follow the ABA method. So for some children this is a good option to pursue, but of course there are other services that parents will decide are best for them. If you know of any new research in this area I would be happy to receive it.

@Icimoi

Mr Timpson

From memory they weren't referring to the guidance but what we have done is work closely with parents, young people and professionals to make sure the Code of Practice and the regulations are as clear as possible.

PBs are offered as a legal right to REQUEST but LA have to be satisfied that the PB will meet the EHCP outcome for that area of need!
The issue is the fear of PBs removing control in schools and reducing the marketplace as funds are 'Redirected' elsewhere

Mr Timpson, parents currently have the right to ask for ABA, but it emphatically does not mean they will get it even when there is strong evidence in favour of it. In fact, some LAs spend a lot of money on lawyers to do their utmost to resist this. Is the truth that the government does not want to fund expensive therapies even if they work?

Will you be attending the AutismEducation debate on 17.7.14 in the house of commons?

@Crumblemum

So, Gove has gone. Can't say I always liked his attitude (or policies), but at least he knew what he wanted to do. Had strong reforming ideas. What do you think will be different now he's gone?

The Secretary of State has been a great supporter of my efforts to improve life chances for some of our most vulnerable children. I'm sure Nicky Morgan, the new Secretary of State will be equally supportive.

Mr Timpson, if you seriously think the CoP is "as clear as possible" you cannot have been paying attention.

@wasuup2014

Will you be attending the AutismEducation debate on 17.7.14 in the house of commons?

Hi wasuup2014 - the answer is yes. I'm leading the debate for the Government. It should be a good debate and one of a number we've held on autism in recent months.

If not why won't you be attending the autism education debate? Will Nicky Morgab be attending on the 17.7.14?

The last debate on the provision of education for autism was 3 years ago! I am pleased that you will be attending! Will more than 5/6 mps turn up this time to aSEN debate? Thank you for responding #mps4autism

Icimoi - The COP has been written in coproduction with representatives from the NNPCF, CAF and other areas concerned with the reforms. The DfE have taken considerable steps in ensuring that they can facilitate our needs as best they can, but remember that the COP is directed by the Children and Families Act 2014 which, unfortunately, has tied their hands a little. The ethos of the reforms is to create Person Centred Planing, at the heart of this is localisation. So our LAs hold responsibility for ensuring they deliver the best service.
Yes the COP could have been tighter and more structured in parts, but overall it has and will make a huge positive impact to families and the SEND system on the whole!

@JadedAngel

Great! Right, I have a few questions...

1. The upcoming SEND changes make no mention of ensuring children who need 1:1 support to access childcare and preschool can get it. Families across the country are struggling to access this, as the recent Parliamentary Inquiry into Childcare for Disabled Children has shown.

How will you ensure this is addressed?

2. When will the statutory SEND Code of Practice requirements for maintained nursery providers to report on the admission of disabled children be expanded to include private, voluntary and independent settings?

3. How will you ensure the Local Offers include the full range of provision across the childcare sector and set out joined-up information for parents including information providers and the additional support and funding available to cover assessments, intensive support and specialised care? Currently the situation is unclear, patchy, and Local Authorities are not forthcoming with information or adequate support.

thank you!

Hi JadedAngel. The Local Offer is not a directory of services. It has to set out the full range of services the Council expect to be available to families in their borough who have children with SEND. They have to consult parents and young people in drawing up their Local Offer and respond to ongoing comments from them about how the Council will address them. This should include services in early years. We've got extensive guidance for early years settings in the Code but will of course continue to review its impact. In respect of childcare, from September all 2 year old children with SEN will receive 15 hours free early education.

There is no right to ABA, it hasn't been given the same status as other education options where there is a legal right unless unreasonable use resources etc. ABA / other home prog could have been put on same footing as other options but were not. When the LA approach to early intervention is to get the parent to go on a course and teach the child for free or pay ABA consultant to provide intervention which is the LA going to choose? Mine has stated publicly no ABA without tribunal order.

Zarabowden, if the DfE's hands are tied by the Children and Families Act, why do you suggest they aren't responsible for the SEN section of the Act?

And why do you have faith in the willingness or even the means of LAs to make this work? They have been ignoring their legal responsibilities wholesale for years. What is there in this legislation that will change that?

And why not make local offers enforceable?

The right to ask for isn't the same thing as the right to receive unfortunately, even if it is a request for the most cost-effective and efficacious therapy. ABA might be one of the many interventions for autism, but it is the only one with the research behind it, and has been shown penny for penny to be the one that leads to better outcomes.

That is, if you were to spend exactly the same about on ABA for a child with autism as you did on alternative therapies, the outcomes would be better. This has been shown in the research that has come out of Norway recently and is evident in lower necessary spend on adults with autism in the US (where ABA is recommended and provided) and that in the UK (where their opportunities for independence are denied through lack of measurability of progress and consequential lack of accountability).

USA national standards project for autism sets out evidence base. Most uk methods don't make the list. Even ones with evidence are so diluted by the time they reach child the fidelity of original method has been lost.

The Local Offer is not applicable to Early Years settings in the same way as schools, but they do need to appear within the LA local offer - does that help at all??
Also Early Years is an area that has now got more recognition as a service provider for SEN but they still cannot request EHCP assessments and neither can they be a named setting unless part of a maintained school...

@StarlightMcKenzie

Dear Edward,

Thank you for coming. My question is simple.

Why have you reformed the delivery end when it was the accountability and redress that required changing? If you had focussed on that, Local Authorities would now be empowered to abide by the law and deliver their statutory duties and both staff, parents and crucially children would be part of a system that worked well and we could be proud of.

In the last few years investigations have showed woeful inadequacies and biases in the SENDIST process, the lack of Independence of Educational Pyschologists and therapists commissioned by the Local Authorities, the Local Government Ombudsman, and now we are seeing the commissioning of Independent Supporters whose training and job specification seems to be to soften parents resolve to hold Local Authorities and the Government to account.

This is also most transparent by the refusal of any Local Authority to have trialled direct payments (for anything other than areas they were already being used for) the first time around without penalty, and despite being paid for this, and the continuing frustration of parents who are still being refused based on local policy.

How can any reform be meaningful and justify the considerable resources of implementation, when those overseeing the process were inadequate to start with and are now, in the ambiguity created by the reforms, required to rely on nothing more than their personal opinion, knowing that there are no straightforward paths of redress or accountability for those?

Hi StarlightMcKenzie - great name! By focusing on the front end of delivery (early identification, co-production, joint-commissioning etc) that has parents and young people at the heart of planning, assessment, implementation and review of progress, the need for redress should reduce which is better for everyone. However, transparency and accountability are also key to people having confidence in the new arrangements. That's why we are piloting a wider role for the tribunal as well as working with Ofsted to look at how we can better inspect the whole range of SEN services together and from the viewpoint of the child or young person.

You know that LEA's really stretch the boundaries of the Law and SENCODEOFPRACTICE and do everything they can to not provide for children's needs, don't you Edward? I have just been forced into my 6th tribunal for my child who has full time 1-1 and multiple complex needs. LEA's don't want to work with Parents. They fail children and famillies and push them to the limits.

Please will you answer questions about bringing LAs to account when they break the law

@OneInEight

Two questions - but they are related so hopefully will be allowed.

Why is the provision for academically able, high functioning autistic children so poor throughout the country? Neither of my sons have been able to cope in mainstream due to anxiety but there is nowhere either in our local authority nor in the two neighbouring boroughs for them to go at secondary that can meet both behavioural and academic needs.

Why does it take so long to get support for such children. Both of my sons now require specialist provision (which we have been fortunate enough to obtain albeit at considerable distance) but I truly believe that if help had been given when their problems first became apparent that they could have coped in mainstream and not suffered such severe mental problems.

Hi OneInEight. The issues you rightly raise are some of the many reasons why we need to reform SEN support and get earlier identification. It's why we fund the Autism Education Trust to train staff in understanding the presentation and support needed for children with high-functioning autism. I think its also a step forward that from September school performance will be judged against the progression of ALL pupils, rather than just those who get the right grades.

I have faith because I sit within the strategic delivery partners within my area and am influencing change at a local level.

Is the reform process a complete success - ie will it close all loopholes and provide us with the best care for our children and young people imaginable? No!
However the changes that are being put in place are influencing a CULTURE CHANGE and that is the key! once this has swept through the system (and yes it may take years) people will see that prevention is better than cure, that investment of time, resources, and funding SAVES money, and they will come around and demand more and better care for our little ones.

But change is hard for a lot of people, and when a system has been so completely entrenched for over 30 years with some practices never changing, it will take time to catch on.

Thank you for answering my question Edward. Personally, I'd rather the role of the tribunal service wasn't widened until they were at least competent, consistent and fair in the role they have now and with less of a lottery-type outcome for the children whose parents use their services, as well as genuinely free to use (rather than the pretence).

I agree with starlightmckenzie.

Many Children are being failed. I don't know if you realise the size and scope of this tragedy.