Funding for SEN support?

[cantkeepawayforever]

I know this information will be available somewhere, but i know that the collective knowledge of MN is probably quicker...

How is funding for SEN allocated to schools? It is often said - though I am happy to be corrected - that schools have to put in their own money up to a certain amount, before any additional costs of a specific high needs SEN child, as detailed in their EHCP, are paid for separately.

My question is whether the block of money given to schools (either directly, as for an academy, or via the LA) takes the proportion of children with SEN at the school into account, or whether it is the same regardless of %SEN?

So does a school with, say, 40% of children on the SEN register get 4x as much of 'the SEN element of the block grant' as a school with 10% of children with SEN does? Or does the former school simply have (about) 4x as much cost to meet out of the same amount of money?

Further, does the amount of money given to schools vary depending on what 'level' of SEN the child is on the register at - EHCP, MyPlan, MyPlan+ or whatever nomenclature is being used? Or is it the same amount for all in terms of 'block' funding, with the high needs children then having to apply for additional 'over and above the norm' costs?

Also, does the amount vary by area, as the basic amount of money per child does anyway, under the funding formula by county?

Thanks for your help - if it is all clearly explained in a document somewhere, then a link to that would be perfect!

How is funding for SEN allocated to schools? It is often said - though I am happy to be corrected - that schools have to put in their own money up to a certain amount, before any additional costs of a specific high needs SEN child, as detailed in their EHCP, are paid for separately. Yes, absolutely, Schools have to pay the first £6000 of any SEN provision.

*My question is whether the block of money given to schools (either directly, as for an academy, or via the LA) takes the proportion of children with SEN at the school into account, or whether it is the same regardless of %SEN?

So does a school with, say, 40% of children on the SEN register get 4x as much of 'the SEN element of the block grant' as a school with 10% of children with SEN does? Or does the former school simply have (about) 4x as much cost to meet out of the same amount of money?*

I THINK that the notional funding is not related to the actual number of children with special needs but just the number expected to be in a school based on the overall school numbers. So schools with higher than average SEN numbers will suffer in financial terms as the block grant will not reflect the higher proportion.

Further, does the amount of money given to schools vary depending on what 'level' of SEN the child is on the register at - EHCP, MyPlan, MyPlan+ or whatever nomenclature is being used? Or is it the same amount for all in terms of 'block' funding, with the high needs children then having to apply for additional 'over and above the norm' costs?

Children who have an EHCP granted receive specific funding ( on top of the notional funding mentioned above) to contribute towards the additional costs of ( say) 1;1 funding. However, this funding nowhere near covers the actual costs. For example, my authority "pays" £10.16 per hour for 1;1 support. However the "cheapest" teaching assistant costs the school £15.60 in salary and on costs. So, for each EHCP, the school will need to pay £6000 plus £5 per hour of entitlement.

Also, does the amount vary by area, as the basic amount of money per child does anyway, under the funding formula by county?
Yes, different authorities will contribute different amounts.

Thanks spanieleyes.

EHC plan funding is separate but the Basic SEN funding is not ring-fenced and is based on a quite a complex funding formula which isn’t related to how many pupils there are on the SEN register at that time.

Eg last year, we had two children join us from another school, both with significant needs halfway through the year. To request an assessment for an EHC plan, we would be expected to evidence spending over £6000 on each child, but we weren’t given that £12,000.

spaniel, maybe you can answer this, we are in possession of a totally crap EHCP for DS who currently needs 1:1 and more and the school says "his banding from the LEA doesn't pay enough for that".
In fact the 1:1 isn't even specified in hours and when we have a legal EHCP we assume the LEA will have to give more but we also assume it still won't be enough because a) they are a pile of pants and b) they have this ridiculous banding.
What does the school do then?

the school says "his banding from the LEA doesn't pay enough for that"

What amount/banding is specified? Which LEA? How long has he has the plan?

Can you request an emergency annual review?

It is tricky! Our EHCPs don't have any hours or funding written into them but they are placed into 4 bands ( mild, moderate, severe and profound) These equate to roughly 12-17, 17-21, 21-26 and 31 hours of funding. As a school we are told which band the funding falls into and, if we persist, we can find out the hours which are meant to be funded. ( Except we have the discrepancy between the LA funding of £10.16 per hour and the actual cost of £15.60 to contend with!)
We have annual reviews when I can request additional banding and an emergency review could do the same. However, this has only happened once to my knowledge ( when a child with profound autism, non verbal, no toileting ability, who needed feeding, changing, dressing etc, was initially given 12 hours funding!) but is possible!

If a school doesn't have the necessary funding and can't access any more, their response will be one of two things-they will do the best they can and prioritise the time they have or they will have to take some TA support from elsewhere ( if they have any spare!)

It is all about what the EHC Plan says. If it says that there is a need for a full time 1 to 1 support then the school should be providing that, even though in practice the extra funding does not cover it.
If the EHC Plan says that they are giving the school X towards their special needs then the school can spend the money how they want as long as they can show the pupil is making some progress.
It sounds from your response that it is much more like the latter.
What exactly does the EHC Plan say?

A lot of LAs will use this term 'banding'. These LAs are most often the problematic ones. Your EHCP is probably to blame to be honest. It should look like a shopping list that shows exactly what the child's need is, how it will be met and by who and realistic targets that need to be reviewed every X terms or whatever you feel necessary. This should also be reflected at the end when it comes to costings. A lot of EHC plans are not worth the paper they're written on.

Just remember if the LA says that the banging thing is their policy, kindly remind them that their policy does not trump the law. No where in the law does it say anything about banding. Instead of fighting the banding though I would fight for a better worded EHCP that is very clear. It should be clear for anyone that reads your childs plan what is wrong, who is providing the help, how its effectiveness will be checked and how much it will cost.

Tbh it's most important that the provision in part F is specified and quantified because if that's the case legally it has to be provided and banding and funding doesn't come into it. The school need to take that up with the LA as funding isn't a parent's concern.If you have a specified and quantified part F then you have legal recourse by threatening the LA with Judicial Review if the school don't make the provision.

I'm not an expert, but in response to your query about funding %, I think that every school gets a certain amount but then if you have a higher than average % of SEN you can apply for more money under the 'cluster of needs' definition.

Burt if you have a tiny %SEN then you get to keep the money [eyes local school with very, very low SEN but which complains vociferously about its lack of funding through narrowed eyes]?

OK, it's in a poorly funded LA. But then so are the other local schools, which DON'T make this huge song and dance but DO have to find money to meet the needs of much more normal levels of SEN children.....

@hiredandsqueak it's the EHCP that's at fault and we have to get that sorted at tribunal.
DS is in Y3 and about a year behind academically but cannot currently go into class at all (anxiety, behaviour) so needs 1:1 full time.
I think our LEA bands have numbers not designations but the solicitor is familiar with their uselessness. I am just concerned they will still try and give the school too little money.

If they do give too little money then that is the school's problem though and not your concern. If F is specified and quantified then school have to provide it.
What should happen is that F is specified and quantified and the cost of the provision is ascertained then the school agree with the funding needed to meet the EHCP.
What actually happens is the LA tells the school what they will provide and the school then short change the children as they can't afford the support.
If school's are unlucky enough to come up against a parent who will use the law to ensure their child gets the provision then either they take the support from other children to pacify a parent (happened in my daughter's case) or they go to the LA and demand the funding they need to meet the EHCP.

SENCo did say to me by demanding that my daughter got the 1 to 1 support as per her EHCP I was taking it from another child. Suspect she was pretty shocked when I said that's not my problem though that is yours but if you want pass on my details to the parents and I will help them ensure their child's needs are met as well.