Inclusion Strategy Project Report

ROCHDALE INCLUSION STRATEGY PROJECT REPORT

CONTENTS 1. Summary of recommendations 2

2. Project Brief 3

3. Methodology 3

4. Rochdale borough Context 4

5. National Policy Context 14

6. Areas for Development 16

7. A Shared View of Inclusion 17

8. Early Identification of Needs 20

9. Supporting Pupils’ Social, Emotional and Mental Health Needs 24

10. A preventative Pupil Referral Service Offer 27

11. A Continuum of SEND Provision 33

12. Strategic Accountability 42

13. References 46

Appendix 1: A note on SEND Data 47 Appendix 2: Action Plan 48 Appendix 3: Croydon Wedge of Nurture 54

Linda Wright, Inclusion Strategy Consultant, February 2020

1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Area for development Recommendations 1 Agree a shared view of  Agree a set of principles to underpin a Rochdale approach to inclusion which inclusion and how to secure will support effective practice improved outcomes, drawing  Develop a flexible PRU offer with a focus on preventing exclusion on a stronger evidence base  Work with college or AP providers to commission KS4 vocational provision for successful inclusive  Review Fair Access protocols in context of developing preventative PRU practice interventions  Consider an inclusion champion with a strong track record teaching in challenging settings to drive implementation of Rochdale’s inclusion strategy 2 Define and agree the level of  Ensure a graduated response to meeting the needs of pupils with additional complexity mainstream needs is embedded in primary and secondary school practice schools should manage and  Offer guidance to schools on putting in place appropriate and timely enable additional needs to be interventions to meet needs at an early stage identified and supported early  Offer additional assessment support for primary school pupils to ensure they are accessing appropriate provision  Clarify LA inclusion support offer to schools to ensure a consistent and coherent approach 3 Adopt a nurture approach  Schools to develop relationship based behaviour policies in light of EPS across all schools to improve Relationship Policy Guidance and aligned with Rochdale Relationships outcomes for pupils with a Manifesto range of social, emotional and  Consider a Rochdale wide nurture approach with staged levels of provision communication needs and making the universal offer an expectation in all schools 4 Redefine the role of Brownhill  Separate PRU and specialist provision at Brownhill and relaunch both Learning Community to work provisions; refocus special school intake to pupils with SEMH needs flexibly with schools to reduce  Set up a preventative programme for secondary school pupils at risk of the incidence of exclusions exclusion (assessment, respite, outreach) and secure additional premises to and ensure pupils at risk of accommodate extended offer exclusion are supported early  Consider feasibility of locality based PRS provision to facilitate safeguarding through preventative of pupils and reduce travel times: Middleton / Heywood and Pennine / interventions Rochdale  Develop alternatives to exclusion for primary schools, enabled through locality based assessment and nurture provision  Develop a learning base for pupils not currently accessing their full entitlement, including young people supported through the Youth Justice system  Commission a wider AP offer 5 Develop a continuum of  Produce a commissioning strategy for SEND staged specialist provision  Develop a business case for investment in new provision and enhancing the informed by a specialist place quality of existing settings (specialist and PRS) planning process that draws  Set up SEN resource and nurture bases (number TBD) in mainstream schools on regularly updated to create an intermediate step between mainstream and special school for information on demand trends pupils with ASC and SEMH needs  Plan for matching pupils to new range of provision  Consider further expansion to existing special schools (multi-site) or encouraging further free school bids to create additional specialist provision 6 Improve strategic  Develop a comprehensive performance dashboard drawing together data accountability for the on outcomes for pupils with SEN support and EHC plans with data on the effectiveness of provision with SEN statutory process and cohort profile and placements regular performance  Full dashboard to be reviewed by CWD Partnership Board and CYP monitoring of a Partnership Board comprehensive range of  School data to include contextual information performance indicators

2. PROJECT BRIEF 2.1 The joint CQC / Ofsted SEND inspection of the Local Authority and its partners in 2016 required the Local Authority to: - Increase the capacity of mainstream schools to identify and effectively meet the needs of the increasing population of children and young people with Special Educational Needs and / or Disabilities (SEND), in particular those with autism - Improve the weak educational outcomes for children and young people at the Special Educational Needs (SEN) support stage and reduce the increasingly high number of exclusions for this group

2.2 The Local Authority has identified that despite improvements, there continue to be challenges to the current capacity within both mainstream settings and special schools to ensure that all children benefit from a high quality offer of an education which meets the increasing numbers of children with additional needs and the diversity of need.

2.3 Evidence indicates:

- Further need to reduce pupil exclusion rates - Increasing numbers of pupils at SEN Support and with an EHCP - Greater access needed to specialist services and expertise - Reported increase in the level of need entering into Reception - Increase in children and young people moving into the borough

2.4 The main concern of the borough, schools and partners is that current provision is failing to meet the needs of some of Rochdale’s most vulnerable children and young people.

2.5 With an increase in pupil numbers across the borough in addition to significant pressure on places within the pupil referral service and special schools, the Local Authority needs to ensure sufficiency and appropriateness of provision for the borough’s children and young people to meet current and future pupil need.

2.6 This project seeks to address these issues by focussing on:

- Analysis of current and future gaps in provision - Identification of strengths, weaknesses and gaps in provision across the borough - Contributing to both a borough wide vision and strategy for inclusion - Identification of recommendations for system wide improvements - Identification of recommendations for remodelling of provision - Development with partners of clear and flexible pathways to access provision and additional support

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1` The project brief was developed by a Task and Finish group of Local Authority officers and head teachers. This group has also advised on emerging findings and recommendations.

3.2 The project consultant has met with a range of stakeholders from the Local Authority and schools, as well as the chair of the Rochdale Parent Partnership Forum. School visits have included all special schools, the Pupil Referral Service (PRS), 4 secondary schools and 2 primary schools.

3.3 A review of local data and performance reports, borough policies and the SEND local offer has also informed the project.

3.4 Prior to stakeholder meetings and research into local information sources, a range of key lines of enquiry and information requirements linked to the project brief and the key areas of focus were identified.

4. ROCHDALE BOROUGH CONTEXT 4.1 The profile of Rochdale is considered both in the context of its location within Greater Manchester (GM) and the wider region of the North-West of England and in relation to the national picture.

4.2 The population in Rochdale is growing with net migration gains from people coming into the borough from outside an increasing factor in population growth1. In 2016 (ONS mid-year estimate) there were 216,150 residents. This is reflected in school place planning data which shows demand for reception places in schools exceeding the number of children born in the borough and a larger intake of pupils in year 7 than at reception, indicating inward migration in key stage 2 year groups. The average house building rate in the borough is 330 new houses per year; this has increased to 800 new houses per year in the last 3 years. It appears these new houses are bringing in new young families.

4.3 Rochdale has a relatively young population with 20.1% of the population being under 15, compared with 19.2% across Greater Manchester and 18% in England (ONS mid-year estimates 2016). Whilst the current population is quite young compared to the England average, the latest ONS population projections suggest that this will decrease over time. The largest concentrations of 0-19 year olds are located in areas of high deprivation, particularly in the suburbs surrounding the centre of Rochdale. 54.1% of the 0-19 population live in one of the two most deprived areas.2

4.4 The population is ethnically diverse. According to the 2011 Census 78.6% of the population are White British and 21.4% are from Black Minority Ethnic communities. The largest BME group is Pakistani with 10.5% of the population and the second largest is Bangladeshi with 2.1%. A high proportion of our young population belong to an ethnic minority group (29.3% compared to 21.4% in the all age population). The latest schools census data suggests that the young BME population is increasing.

Deprivation and Impact of Austerity

4.5 The level of deprivation in an area can be used to identify communities who may be in the greatest need of services3. Rochdale is one of the 20% most deprived districts / unitary authorities in England. Almost a third (30.5%) of the population live in areas amongst the 10% most deprived in the country and the borough has amongst the highest levels of deprivation in the North-West region (IMD 2015). At the last census in 2011 ten areas within the borough were among the 3 % most deprived in England with twenty four in the lowest 10%. Among the most deprived were two areas in Langley, one in Heywood and one in Kirkholt (among the 1% most deprived in England) and a number of areas in Central Rochdale and South Kirkholt (among the 10% most deprived in England).

1 Rochdale Borough Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2017-18 2 Rochdale Borough Locality Plan: Equalities Impact Assessment 2017 3 Rochdale, Local Authority Health Profile 2018, Public Health England, published July 2018

4.6 The maps4 below show differences in deprivation within the borough of Rochdale based on national comparisons, using national quintiles of IMD 2015 (map 1) and local quintiles (map 2). The darkest coloured areas are some of the most deprived neighbourhoods in England. The chart shows the percentage of the population who live in areas at each level of deprivation.

4.7 The unemployment rate at 6% is above the average for the North West (4.8%) and the national figure (4.6%). Skills levels are also below the regional averages with 14% of the local population with no qualifications, compared to the North West average of 9.4%. A lower proportion (25.4%) of the population are highly qualified to NVQ level 4 or above compared to the North West (34%). However, the 2017-18 JSNA points to clear signs that the local economy is improving citing the opportunities arising from the Kingsway Business Park, the town centre redevelopment and the high performing Rochdale Sixth Form College.

Health Inequalities

4.8 The health of people in Rochdale is worse than both the England and regional average on a wide range of measures, with life expectancy for both men and women below the England and regional average. In terms of child health, 23.3% (635) of children in year 6 are classified as obese. There are also significant health inequalities within Rochdale with life expectancy in the most deprived areas lower than in the least deprived areas (9.6 years for men and 7.1 years for women).

4.9 Domestic abuse is an issue of increasing concern in Rochdale and has triggered a Public Health Needs Assessment which will be taking place in 2020. For the first 6 months of 2019 there were 1,982 Domestic Violence incidents in Rochdale (GMP). High risk referrals have almost tripled from 2015/16, rising from 365 a year to 971 last year putting increasing pressure on our Independent Domestic Violence Adviser (IDVA) service. Since 2011 there have been 14 Domestic Homicide Reviews, 2 of which are currently ongoing. Since 2016, there have been 8 Serious Case Reviews and 2 Learning Lesson Reviews; domestic abuse has been a feature in 7 of these reviews (70%). As at 31 December 2019, domestic violence was identified in relation to 68% (227) of children on a Child Protection Plan. From 1 April 2019 to the end of Dec 2019 of 64 new cared for children, 20 (31%) have suffered domestic violence.

4.10 The impact of domestic abuse on children’s development, behaviour and mental and physical well-being is well documented. Boys tend to exhibit more externalizing behaviour problems such as aggression and acting out, while girls tend to exhibit more internalizing behaviour problems

4 Rochdale, Local Authority Health Profile, Public Health England, 2018

such as social withdrawal and depression5. This family / community context is important when considering responses to behavioural issues in schools.

Child Poverty 4.11 As one of the boroughs with the highest levels of deprivation in the region, children and families in Rochdale will have been further disadvantaged by austerity in the application of national government policy. Research published by the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that tax and benefit changes since 2010 have hit the poorest families in the UK hardest. It notes that poorer families are concentrated in poorer parts of the country and that the most deprived parts of the England have seen the largest cuts in funding for local government services since 2010; between 2009/10 and 2018/19 spending declined by 31% in the most deprived areas compared with 16% in the least deprived areas.

4.12 About 22% of children live in low income families. A proxy indicator for child poverty is the number of pupils known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals. In 2019 20% of pupils attending primary schools and 21.3% of pupils attending secondary schools in the borough were known to be eligible; this is above both the regional (18.2% in primary schools, 16.8% in secondary schools) and national figures (15.8% in primary schools, 14.1% in secondary schools).

4.13 School Readiness is measured at the end of Reception Year. In 2015/16 63.3% of children were ready for school lower than the proportion of the school population in the North-West (66.7%) and in England (69.3%). For children in receipt of free school meals the proportion was 49.2% compared to 51.5% in the North-West and 55.4% in England.

4.14 Research presented to North West Children’s Services indicates that children living in the most deprived 10% of areas are vastly overrepresented amongst children involved with children’s social care, being 13 times more likely to be subject to a Child Protection Plan and 11 times more likely to enter Local Authority care. Local data confirms this with 58.4% of Children Looked After living in the two most deprived areas. 11.5% of Children Looked After have SEN.

4.15 There is also a strong correlation between how deprived an area is and how many children are recorded as having SEN.6 Analysis for a South London borough’s JSNA in 2014 comparing the number of pupils with SEN in each Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) with the Income Domain Affecting Children Index (IDACI) score for the area found a similarly strong correlation between deprivation and incidence of SEN. It is therefore probable that a similar analysis in Rochdale would show the same correlation.

Prevalence of SEND

4.16 Rochdale has a higher proportion of pupils (3.6%) with EHC plans across its schools than both the average for the region (3.2%) and the national average (3.1). A total of 1753 pupils had EHC plans in January 2019.7 The number is increasing annually in line with the national and regional trend.

5 Alarming Effects of Children’s Exposure to Domestic Violence, Psychology Today, Feb 26 2019 6 Jane Lewis, Ann Mooney, Louca-Mai Brady, Chloe Gill, Amanda Henshall, Natasha Willmott, Charlie Owen, Kate Evans and June Statham (2010) Special Educational Needs and Disability. Understanding Local Variation in Prevalence, Service Provision and Support. DCSF Research Report DCSF-RR211(p35) 7 Special Educational Needs in England 2019, DfE, January 2019 (School Census data)

% of pupils with EHCP 4 3 2 1 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Rochdale North West England

4.17 The population of pupils with SEN is much larger and includes those who receive an individualised programme of SEN support. Rochdale has a lower than expected number of pupils receiving SEN support in its primary schools, 11.5% compared to a regional average of 13% and the national figure of 12.6%. As pupils enter the secondary school the level of SEN support remains the same but exceeds the regional and national figures (both 10.8%) for secondary schools.

4.18 In both primary and secondary schools the number of pupils with EHC plans is above the regional and national figures, with the largest disparity in secondary schools, 2.5% compared to a regional figure of 1.6% and a national average of 1.7%.

% of pupils on SEN Support by % of pupils with EHCP by education phase education phase 15 4 3 10 2 5 1 0 0 Primary Secondary All schools Primary Secondary All schools

Rochdale North West England Rochdale North West England

4.19 The data would appear to support the view expressed by secondary head teachers that some pupils are making the transition to secondary schools without their SEN support needs having been identified and addressed at their primary school.

4.20 There is also significant variation between schools in terms of the numbers of pupils with EHC plans or on SEN Support and indeed the ratio of SEN support to EHC plans with one primary school making no use at all of SEN support. This variation is demonstrated in the scatter grams below.

Prevalence of different types of SEN

4.21 The chart below shows the experience of schools in Rochdale in terms of the range of pupil needs they are currently seeking to meet. It is drawn from the January 2019 schools census and shows the prevalence of different types of SEN across all maintained schools, including special schools. The most prevalent needs in order of magnitude are a moderate learning difficulty, autistic spectrum disorder, speech, language and communications needs and social emotional and mental health needs. The prevalence of different types of SEN in Rochdale differs from the national and regional picture. While in England in 2019 Speech, Language and Communication Needs (SLCN) was the most common primary type of need across all pupils with SEN, in Rochdale this was Moderate Learning Difficulties (MLD) followed by ASC. The incidence of both SLCN and Social Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH) Needs were below the national average.

SEN in Rochdale schools by type of need All SEN – includes SEN support but no specialist assessment… SEN Support and Other Difficulty/Disability EHCPs – source is Autistic Spectrum Disorder School Census data Physical Disability 2019 Multi-Sensory Impairment Visual Impairment Hearing Impairment Speech, Language and Communications… Social, Emotional and Mental Health

Profound & Multiple Learning Difficulty Severe Learning Difficulty Moderate Learning Difficulty Specific Learning Difficulty 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

4.22 The charts below show the incidence of different types of need in Primary and Secondary Schools in September 2019 for pupils with EHC plans. The figures include pupils in SEN resourced provision and are drawn from borough data on resident pupils with EHC plans.

EHCPs by SEN code in Primary Schools Chart includes 9 pupils with 160 Hearing Impairment (HI) and 140 120 7 pupils with ASC in SEN 100 resourced provision. 80 60 40

20 0

EHCPs by SEN Code in Secondary Schools Chart includes 11 pupils with 140 HI and 9 pupils with a 120 Physical Disability (PD) in SEN 100 resourced provision. 80 60 40

20 0

4.23 The most prevalent need is ASC, as is the case nationally, although the incidence in Rochdale is higher than for England and for the North West region. Rochdale also has a higher percentage of ASC pupils in mainstream settings with 18.8% of its SEND pupils with ASC in primary settings and 19.5% in secondary schools, compared to the England average of 7.3% and 9.7% respectively. Without the inclusion of pupils on SEN support within the count, the incidence of Moderate Learning Difficulties is low.

Outcomes for young people in Rochdale in the context of deprivation

4.24 The Early Years and Foundation Stage Profile provides a baseline for the level of development of children entering key stage 1. In Rochdale there is a significant gap in the level of development across the whole range of early learning goals, with the exception of technology, against the national average; it is also below the average for the North-West. This reflects the level of complexity of need reported by primary schools among children starting in Key Stage 1.

4.25 Further analysis undertaken for North West Children’s Services compares Local Authority performance in terms of the national rank in each threshold measure to the upper tier IDACI rank of the local authority in 2019 Index of Multiple Deprivation, in other words controlling for the impact of deprivation. On each measure a reduced but significant gap remains. While a similar

picture applies to other Local Authorities in the North-West, there are exceptions within GM notably Blackburn with Darwin, Bury and Trafford outperforming the other GM boroughs.

4.26 Outcomes for pupils at Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4 as measured by national progress and attainment measures show similar gaps, with the exception of grammar, punctuation and spelling at Key Stage 2 and EBAC attainment and progress at Key Stage 4.

Outcomes for pupils with SEND 4.27 The Ofsted CQC SEND inspection in 2016 found that children and young people with a statement of special educational needs or an EHCP achieve positive outcomes and their needs are well met.8 Attainment and progress measures were in line with national averages at all key stages and remain so in 2019.

4.28 However, educational outcomes for pupils at SEN support stage were judged to be weak. The borough has since been able to evidence9 improvements in the percentage of pupils identified at SEN support attaining a good level of development at the Early Years Foundation Stage with the gap to the national average reduced from 6.8% in 2016 to 3.6% in 2019. There is also an improving trend at Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 from 2016 to 2018, although the gap to national has widened slightly in 2019. At Key Stage 4 in 2019 Attainment 8 (overall )and the percentage of students achieving English and Maths at grade 4 was broadly in line with the national average, Progress 8 (overall) and the progress of students achieving English or Maths at or above grade 4 was significantly below (-8%) the national average.

4.29 Outcomes for pupils with ASC in Rochdale are better than the national average for this cohort. At the end of the Early Years Foundation stage 34.6% of pupils identified with ASC at SEN Support stage met a good level of development in 2018, well above the national average of 19.5%. At key stage 1, 65% ASC pupils at the SEN support stage met the expected standard in the year 1 phonics screening check compared with the national average for the pupil group of 59%. Similarly 51.9% of pupils attained the expected standard in reading compared with the national average for the pupil group of 50.8%, 40.4% pupils attained at this level in writing compared with the national average of 38.3% for this pupil group and 51.9% attained at the expected standard in mathematics compared with the national average of 51.1% . On the combined measure of reading, writing and mathematics 35.6% attained at the expected standard compared with the national average for this cohort group of 34.7%. At key stage 2, with the exception of reading, outcomes continue to be above the national average for the pupil group.

4.30 Participation rates for year 11 school leavers are improving (97.1% in 2019, an increase of 1% on the previous year and levels of NEET are reducing 2.0% in 2019 compared to 2.5% in the previous year). Attainment at age 1910 , however, is below the regional and the England average including for those recorded as having SEN in year 11 (51.6% of SEN group in Rochdale achieved level 2 by age 19 compared to 52.9% and 54.5% for North West and England respectively). There

8 Joint Local Area Inspection in Rochdale, Ofsted and CQC, November 2016 9 Report to Children and Young People with Disabilities Strategic Partnership Board, December 2019 10 Level 2 and 3 attainment by young people aged 19 in 2018, DfE, April 2019

is a similar gap in attainment at level 3 (SEN group 22.2% compared to NW 25% and England 26.6%).

4.31 Patterns of school attendance11 are close to the average for the NW region and England. Overall absence in 2017/18, the latest period for which full year figures were published, is 4.4% (NW and national 4.2%), while persistent absence is 9.9%, slightly below the average for the region (10.1%) and above the national average (8.7%). DN: Is there a report showing rate for PRU? Also analysis by SEND

Children Missing Education (CME)

4.32 Local authorities have a duty under section 436A of the Education Act 1996 to make arrangements to establish the identities of children in their area of statutory school age, who are not registered pupils at a school and are not receiving suitable education. Recording of CME across Local Authorities is inconsistent making any cross-comparison of data near impossible. Rochdale currently chairs the termly NW CME network meeting. Processes are robust and the team receive a steady flow of referrals both in respect of Children Missing Education and Non-arrival notifications. Schools are supportive of processes and in the main engage well. There are effective and strong multi-agency links with partner agencies with good information sharing processes in place with key stakeholders. Procedures are well established in respect of reporting of CME to SLT and the safeguarding partnership. Cases are triaged and dealt with in a timely manner and are RAG rated by experienced officers to manage demand.

4.33 Among Children Missing Education are a group awaiting a school place. Of these 14 require SEN Support and 3 have EHC plans, including one for ASC.

Children Educated at Home (Elective home education)

4.34 Local Authorities across England and Wales are reporting increasing numbers of children being home educated. Rochdale was recognised by Anne Longfield, the Children’s Commissioner for England, as one of only five Local Authorities in England to have responded effectively to the growing concerns around children and young people being removed from school rolls to be electively educated at home. Capacity has recently increased within the team to manage the larger numbers of children (239 in February 2020) being educated at home; of these 40 have been supported back into school. –

4.35 Among the group of children currently educated at home just over 13% have SEN: 24 children require SEN Support (5 ASC, 5 SEMH, 5 MLD,2 SLD,1 SLCN and 1 PD) and 8 children have EHC plans (3 ASD, 2 SEMH, 1 SLCN, 1 SLD, 1 PMLD).

4.36 A small number of pupils (14 in November 2019) receive home tuition for medical reasons including anxiety. Of these 8 are dual registered to their school and the PRS which delivers the home tuition service and 6 are registered solely to the PRS.

11 Pupil Absence in Schools in England 2017-2018, DfE, March 2019

4.37 Rates of exclusion from Rochdale secondary schools are significantly above both regional and national levels, with the most frequently cited reason being ‘persistent disruptive behaviour (45 out of 60 cases in 2017/18). The table below shows data for permanent exclusions from school in 2017/18.12

No of pupils Exclusion rate % Rochdale North West National Primary 14 0.2 0.03 0.03 Secondary 46 0.37 0.29 0.20 Special 0 0 0.03 0.07 Total 45 0.17 0.13 0.10

Rate of permanent exclusion 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 Primary Secondary Special All schools

Rochdale North West England

4.38 Pupils with SEN Support are over-represented in the cohorts of pupils excluded permanently and on a fixed term basis. In 2017-18 0.58% of the SEN support cohort were permanently excluded from school compared to a national average of 0.35%. A similar gap between the national average and the position in Rochdale applies to the cohort of pupils with periods of fixed term exclusion from school.

How inclusive is the Rochdale educational community?

4.39 82% of all schools in Rochdale are currently rated good or outstanding by Ofsted; the four special schools and the Pupil Referral Service (PRS) are currently rated as good.

4.40 There are a number of parameters on which the inclusiveness of an individual school or a Local Authority and its partners might be judged. Data collected nationally by the DfE provides comparisons within regions but does not factor in levels of deprivation within local communities. The contextualised data analysis undertaken for North West Children’s Services (see paragraphs 4.4, 4.15 and 4.16) offers a regional perspective linked to deprivation.

12 Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions in England 2017-2018, DfE, July 2019

4.41 One innovative consultancy, MIME,13 has developed an inclusion index ‘to better understand the landscape of inclusion of SEND pupils in Education across England’. It has combined public data sources to create overall inclusion scores by local authority area. The inclusion score looks at: - Exclusions – rates of exclusion of SEND pupils - Assessment – proportion of SEND pupils with an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) - Placement – school placement of pupils with an EHCP - Attainment – attainment and progress scores of pupils with an EHCP, as well as the proportion not in education, employment or training (NEET)

4.42 By these measures a Local Authority area with a high inclusion score would be one where a high percentage of pupils with SEND are educated in a mainstream school, where pupils with SEND are not disproportionately excluded from school and where they achieve positive outcomes in terms of attainment and progress.

4.43 The table below shows regions in England by their average inclusion scores out of 100 on this index. Overall the North West region sits just below the midpoint on the scale.

13 www.mimeconsulting.co.uk

4.44 The visual below shows Rochdale in relation to the North West region, where it appears a little above the mid-point of the scale (NW average is 44.5).

4.45 Breaking down the Rochdale score into the constituent scores provides a more detailed picture of inclusion:

Inclusion score (out of 100) 45.4 Exclusions 44.5 Assessment 14.5 Placement 64.8 Attainment 44.5

While exclusions and attainment of SEND pupils score just below 50%, the assessment score is particularly low due to the higher than average number of EHC plans in the borough and lower use of SEN support to meet the needs of SEND pupils. The placement score, however, is high as many pupils with EHC plans are educated in mainstream schools rather than independent or specialist placements.

5 NATIONAL POLICY CONTEXT 5.1 Policy on SEND continues to be driven by the whole system SEND reforms introduced in September 2014 and enshrined in the SEND Code of Practice: 0-25, published 2014, last updated in May 2015. A parliamentary inquiry was launched in April 2018 to consider the impact of the 2014 reforms, taking evidence from a wide range of stakeholders on the challenges created by the reforms. Their report, published in October 2019, cites the shortfall in funding to implement

the new SEND system and a lack of accountability across schools, Local Authorities and central government as key challenges.

5.2 The National Audit Office undertook a review in 2019 to assess how well pupils with SEND are being supported. It examined: - the system for supporting pupils with SEND and the outcomes it is achieving - funding, spending and financial sustainability - the quality of support and experiences of pupils and parents

5.3 The report, published in September 2019 concludes with a description of the current position that will be familiar across the country:

‘How well pupils with SEND are supported affects their well-being, educational attainment and long-term life prospects. Some pupils with SEND are receiving high-quality support that meets their needs, whether they attend mainstream schools or special schools. However, the significant concerns that we have identified indicate that many other pupils are not being supported effectively, and that pupils with SEND who do not have EHC plans are particularly exposed. The system for supporting pupils with SEND is not, on current trends, financially sustainable. Many local authorities are failing to live within their high-needs budgets and meet the demand for support. Pressures – such as incentives for mainstream schools to be less inclusive, increased demand for special school places, growing use of independent schools and reductions in per-pupil funding – are making the system less, rather than more, sustainable. The Department needs to act urgently to secure the improvements in quality and sustainability that are needed to achieve value for money.’

5.4 The national programme for creating new school places through the establishment of free schools has enabled Local Authorities to bid for capital funding for specialist Free Schools in Wave 13; Rochdale was successful in securing funding for an ASC free school with 75 places to open in 2021. Wave 14 of the programme allowed for bids to establish mainstream free schools, including schools with SEN resourced provision; Rochdale has secured 2 mainstream free schools for secondary aged pupils. 5.5 Some additional revenue funding - £700 million - has been allocated in 2020/21 for pupils with SEND. 5.6 A SEND review was announced by the government in September 2019 to address problems in the support available for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities. It will focus on how “incentives and accountability” can be used to make sure schools provide the best possible support for children with SEND. The government has also said that it would look to "strike the right balance of state-funded provision across inclusive mainstream and specialist places." This is likely to result in a refresh of the SEND Code of Practice in 2020.

5.7 In March 2018 the government also commissioned a review of exclusion practice, looking at how head teachers use exclusion in practice and why some groups of pupils are more likely to be excluded. The Timpson Review of School Exclusions reported in May 2019, offering an analysis of the challenges, disincentives and lack of clarity and guidance that are familiar to schools and Local Authorities. The recommendations for change include: - Making schools accountable for the results of pupils they exclude and taking greater control of the funding and commissioning for Alternative Provision

- Promoting the role of Alternative Provision, which includes recognising the best institutions as teaching schools so they can share best practice across the wider system. - Strengthening the oversight role for Councils, including making Local Authorities advocates for vulnerable children - Consulting on placing a revised limit on the total number of days a pupil can be (fixed-term) excluded for - Reviewing the reasons given for exclusions – particularly the use of the “other” category – so that the “reasons …. are more accurately captured”. - Updating guidance on exclusions, including ‘off-rolling’ definition - Addressing underfunding and establishing an Inclusive Practice fund - Requiring Ofsted to “consistently recognise schools who succeed in supporting all children” under its leadership and management category - Investing in improving and expanding buildings and facilities for pupils who need AP

5.8 While the government published its response in May 2019, there is as yet no news on how the new government plans to progress any of the recommendations.

6 AREAS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN ROCHDALE

6.1 The areas identified for development are:

1. Agree a shared view of inclusion and how to secure improved outcomes, drawing on a stronger evidence base for successful inclusive practice 2. Define and agree the level of complexity mainstream schools should manage and enable additional needs to be identified and supported early 3. Adopt a nurture approach across all schools to improve outcomes for pupils with a range of social, emotional and communication needs 4. Redefine the role of Brownhill Learning Community to work flexibly with schools to reduce the incidence of exclusions and ensure pupils at risk of exclusion are supported early through preventative interventions 5. Develop a continuum of staged specialist provision informed by a specialist place planning process that draws on regularly updated information on demand trends 6. Improve strategic accountability for the effectiveness of provision with regular performance monitoring of a comprehensive range of performance indicators

7 A SHARED VIEW OF INCLUSION

1. Agree a shared view of inclusion and how to secure improved outcomes, drawing on a stronger evidence base for successful inclusive practice 1a Agree a set of principles to underpin a Rochdale approach to inclusion which will support effective practice 1b Develop a flexible PRU offer with a focus on preventing exclusion (see recommendation 4.2) 1c Work with college or AP providers to commission KS4 vocational provision 1d Review Fair Access protocols in context of developing preventative PRU interventions 1e Consider an inclusion champion with a strong track record teaching in challenging settings to drive implementation of Rochdale’s inclusion strategy

7.1 There is a shared commitment to inclusion across the Local Authority and its schools and a determination to reduce rates of exclusion, particularly in secondary schools. The need for a strategic approach to inclusion across the borough to guide practice in schools has been recognised and is driving this project. Both the Pioneer Trust, to which all secondary schools and the PRS belong, and RAPH, the Rochdale Association of Primary Head teachers, have nominated head teachers to lead on inclusion.

7.2 Funding held by the Local Authority as a result of managed transfers and exclusions was set aside in 2017-18 to fund school based projects to promote inclusion. This has provided secondary schools with the opportunity to test and evaluate a range of interventions. All the schools that participated have reported changes in practice that have led to positive outcomes. There is clearly considerable reflection taking place and a growing local evidence base for effective practice.

7.3 Additionally Positive Steps were commissioned in 2018 (i) to review national good practice in reducing exclusions for young people with SEND and promoting inclusion and (ii) to provide some insight into the causes of exclusion. Their report14cites examples of effective practice across the country and some of the factors that can support inclusion as well as providing links to resources that schools can access. Recommendations include a ‘whole-school’ approach to inclusion, a register of providers of Alternative Provision quality assured by the Local Authority, which is now in place, and enhanced collaboration between primary and secondary schools to support successful transition to secondary school for vulnerable pupils.

7.4 A pilot project run by the Educational Psychology Service evidenced the need for schools to refer pupils early at the first sign of a behavioural issue. Early regerrals enabled educational psychologists and school staff to work together to identify unmet needs and plan for reasonable adjustments and appropriate support to prevent escalation. The pilot also found that pastoral and SEN staff working together was a key success factor and that where a whole school approach was embedded, staff were more confident and consistent in their knowledge, understanding and practice.

7.5 Discussions with head teachers to inform this project have highlighted the challenges schools face. There were frequent references to issues of equity between schools and to different levels of

14 Reducing Exclusions for Young People with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), Positive Steps, September 2018

tolerance of and response to challenging behaviour. These issues need to be discussed openly between schools to agree a shared approach and are explored further below.

7.6 Rochdale has increasing numbers of pupils seeking admission to school in-year. During the 2018- 19 academic year, 121 children were permanently added to secondary school rolls in year 10. 5 out of the borough’s 12 secondary schools admitted 10 or more of the pupils, with one school admitting 25 and another not admitting any pupils from this cohort. In terms of complexity of learning needs, 6 of the pupils had an EHC plan and 17 had previously identified SEN support needs; a further 45 were new to the UK or their previous school was not known, meaning that any additional learning needs were yet to be identified. The number also included pupils admitted following a managed move (4) and pupils reintegrated from the PRS (8).

7.7 The size and complexity of pupil populations varies between schools and within particular year groups and this contextual information needs to be taken into account in any judgement of equity. Head teachers have raised concerns that a disproportionate number of in-year admissions, often of pupils with complex needs, are to schools which are below PAN. This has an impact on these schools’ capacity to meet needs effectively and some question whether relevant contextual information is given sufficient weight in panel decisions.

7.8 Local data for secondary schools for the 2018-19 academic year indicates considerable variation in patterns of exclusion between schools.

Permanent as a proportion of all exclusions by school 100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% School School School School School School School School School School School School A B C D E F G H I J K L

Permanent Fixed

7.9 Given the degree of variation between schools, the Pioneer Trust might consider a peer review approach, similar to the SEN review process, to explore the factors driving exclusion in particular schools and offer peer support to tackle challenges. A similar approach could be taken by primary collaboratives.

7.10 One of the factors head teachers cite as affecting exclusion decisions is differing levels of tolerance between schools to varying types of behaviour. In 2017-18 the most recent period for which full year national data has been published, 75% of permanent exclusions in Rochdale schools (45 out of 60) were for persistent disruptive behaviour while only 15% (6) were for physical assault. Responses to disruptive behaviour clearly differ between schools and it would, therefore, be helpful to agree common guidance on sanctions and thresholds to secure a more consistent response across schools. A similar approach has been taken by Manchester City. Its recently developed Inclusion Strategy has ‘Exclusion as a Last Resort’ as one of strands. Planned action includes reviewing and reissuing guidance on exclusions and developing a checklist of activity to be undertaken prior to exclusion.

7.11 Managed Moves are used in Rochdale as elsewhere as an alternative to exclusion. While this can be appropriate where a fresh start in a new school contributes to meeting a pupil’s needs effectively, there are instances where children are moved without their needs being met. In 2018- 19 there were 100 managed moves; of these 41% were successful (still attending new school after 12 weeks), an improvement on 36% in the previous year. To ensure the intervention is used appropriately, the current protocol for managed moves needs to be revisited and cases reviewed to document and promote success factors.

7.12 While the focus in reducing exclusions is rightly on schools and how they understand and meet the needs of their pupils, schools operate within a wider context which needs to be structured to facilitate inclusion. Two key issues that need to be addressed are the development of a flexible PRU offer with a focus on intervening early to prevent exclusion (see paragraphs 10.10 – 10.15 for more detail) and a wider range of alternative provision at key stage 4.

7.13 Secondary schools would like access to vocational pathways starting in key stage 4 to help pupils who need a broader or alternative curriculum to sustain their engagement in learning and progress to college courses post-16. There is currently no key stage 4 vocational provision at Hopwood Hall College. Schools on the southern edge of the borough are able to refer pupils to key stage 4 courses in Oldham and Bury but this is not an option for all Rochdale pupils who would benefit. Hopwood Hall College has been receptive to an approach from the Local Authority to address this and is now working with the Local Authority to develop a key stage 4 vocational offer.

GOOD PRACTICE EXAMPLE Manchester Inclusion Strategy Our Priorities - Working in partnership in a coherent, strengths based way to support inclusive practice - Listening and responding to the voice of children, young people and their families - Developing the aspirations and skills of children and young people - Improving social, emotional and mental health and wellbeing - Positive transitions between settings, schools and post-16 provisions - Identify needs early, protecting vulnerable children and young people - A highly skilled and well supported workforce - High quality continuum of intervention provision and specialist support - Exclusion as a last resort

8 EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDS

2. Define and agree the level of complexity mainstream schools should manage and enable additional needs to be identified and supported early 2a Ensure a graduated response to meeting the needs of pupils with additional needs is embedded in primary and secondary school practice 2b Offer guidance to schools on putting in place appropriate and timely interventions to meet needs at an early stage 2c Offer additional assessment support for primary school pupils to ensure they are accessing appropriate provision 2d Clarify LA inclusion support offer to schools to ensure a consistent and coherent approach

School Readiness 8.1 Research 15 published by the Wave Trust highlights the critical importance of the early years in transforming life opportunities and outcomes. It is clear this is a key focus in Rochdale.

8.2 School Readiness is championed by the Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership. Its evidence based delivery model includes developing a GM-wide predictive tool for earlier interventions. It is also implementing best practice pathways, including pathways for parent infant mental health, speech, communication and language development and integrated support services and interventions for families with more complex needs, as well as making the most of enablers such as GM digital and joint commissioning.

8.3 Rochdale’s School Readiness Strategy 2018-20 has as its primary strategic aim ‘to increase the Good Level of Development (GLD) in Rochdale as a minimum to the current national average by 2020’, in line with the Greater Manchester aspiration that ‘the proportion of children with a GLD at the end of reception will be at least the national average across all GM by 2020 and 80% by 2025’.16 Rochdale already exceeds the England average for the take up of universally funded early education and is narrowing the gap with respect to GLD; this in the context of rates of child poverty (IDACI score) exceeding both the GM and national average.

8.4 A Rochdale integrated support pathway, the 1001 days pathway, has been developed to map access to both universal services and additional support and is being piloted in one locality – Middleton. The targeted interventions available will be reviewed to ensure they meet the range of high level needs and ensure a High Needs pathway beyond the 1001 days is developed and implemented. This will need to include a focus on the key area of social, emotional and communication needs.

8.5 The work on school readiness fits within established integrated support strategies and practice including the Rochdale Early Help strategy and the wider Family Services model and provides a strong foundation for ensuring that the most complex additional support needs are identified by age 5 for children born in the borough.

15 The 1001 Critical Days – The Importance of the Conception to Age 2 Period, The Wave Trust, 2014 16 GM School Readiness Strategy

8.6 There is evidence of early identification of SEN with 39% of Education, Health and Care plans open in Oct-Dec 2019 having been opened during the Early Years phase, prior to starting school. By the end of key stage 2, this figure rose to 86%.

8.7 Of those pupils whose needs were identified at secondary school, the majority were for ASC or SEMH. A small cohort (7) identified as having Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties suggests that some pupils whose needs are identified in the secondary phase are removals into the borough.

8.8 The proportion of pupils identified as requiring SEN support is lower than expected compared to national (see paragraphs 4.17 – 4.20), suggesting that further consideration should be given to assessment and effective use of the graduated response in both primary and secondary schools.

Assessment of Needs and Graduated Response 8.9 The 0-25 SEND Code of Practice (2015) identifies ‘four broad areas of [special educational] need and support’: communication and interaction; cognition and learning; social, emotional and mental health; sensory and/or physical needs. These areas allow schools to gain an overview of their pupils’ range of needs.

8.10 The SEND Code emphasises: ‘The purpose of identification is to work out what action the school needs to take, not to fit a pupil into a category. In practice, individual children or young people often have needs that cut across all these areas and their needs may change over time... A detailed assessment of need should ensure that the full range of an individual’s needs is identified, not simply the primary need.’

8.11 Guidance17 to support schools with this process has been issued by the SEN Service. It does not appear to be readily referred to by schools and is largely focused on funding bands with very general information on provision at different levels of need. More specific guidance for schools would be helpful on the range of interventions and support, mapped across the four areas of learning, which might be offered to inform planning for a graduated response. Many Local Authorities have developed their own detailed guidance working in collaboration with their schools to agree expectations at each level of need and setting out detailed descriptors of provision. This is a complex and time consuming piece of work and a pragmatic approach might be to adopt a set of descriptors published and tested elsewhere. Teachers in Rochdale, who have worked in the city of Manchester, are familiar with Manchester’s Matching Provision to Need Tool (MPNT)18 and have commented positively on its effectiveness in informing planning for pupils with SEN.

8.12 For some pupils with very complex needs, Primary schools are indicating that they would like to be able to access additional support and expertise to assess needs and plan appropriately, particularly for pupils with SEMH needs. Support for SEN assessment is currently offered by the Educational Psychology Service and additionally for pupils with ASC by RANS but there is a need for further capacity. Assessment of SEMH needs could be offered by the PRS or by primary SEMH nurture provision. A Special School outreach offer would also help to strengthen provision in schools.

8.13 Schools in Rochdale receive a wide range of support from the Council’s Early Help and Schools teams. They are generally very positive about teams they interact with but do not always hear consistent messages. Equally within the Early Help and Schools service busy teams do not always share information as well as they should and check that they are working to the same principles. This can result in teams unwittingly working ‘against’ one another rather than collaboratively or occasionally lead to confusion over where responsibility for a particular activity lies and how it fits with other linked initiatives to deliver a planned outcome. Establishing distributed leadership across services for key pieces of work might help to address this.

8.14 SENCOs in schools have a critical role to play to ensure that children with SEND receive the support they need in school. SENCO networks are vital in developing and supporting inclusion in schools through exploration of practice and sharing knowledge and expertise. Work is underway to strengthen these networks and encourage improved attendance from schools.

8.15 Information and guidance for schools is also not easy to access once it has been sent out through the school bag. This is about to be addressed by the establishment of a new Rochdale

17 Special Educational Needs and Disability Support and Funding in Rochdale Mainstream Schools and Academies, RBC, September 2018

18 https://search3.openobjects.com/mediamanager/manchester/fsd/files/matching_provision_to_need_tool_5_ 14.doc

Schools’ intranet and Engage Rochdale, a one stop web based shop for the provision of services for education.

GOOD PRACTICE EXAMPLE RANS autism champion programme – early identification of ASC, effective use of graduated response??

9 SUPPORTING PUPILS’ SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL AND MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS

3. Adopt a nurture approach across all schools to improve outcomes for pupils with a range of social, emotional and communication needs 3a Schools to develop relationship based behaviour policies in light of EPS Relationship Policy Guidance and aligned with Rochdale Relationships Manifesto 3b Consider a Rochdale wide nurture approach with staged levels of provision and making the universal offer an expectation in all schools

9.1 ‘There is a substantial body of research evidence to suggest that young people’s Social Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH) needs has a significant impact on their learning and progress through the curriculum (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [NICE] 2008,2009). It follows then that intervention to understand and address learners’ social and emotional needs helps to support academic attainment (Public Health England, 2014).19

9.2 The 2014 SEND Code of Practice has promoted a shift towards viewing behaviour as a communication of unmet need highlighting the importance of viewing young people whose behaviour is challenging as vulnerable rather than troublesome. It highlights the need to focus on understanding the experiences and emotions that might drive certain behaviours, rather than the behaviour itself.20

9.3 The Rochdale Educational Psychology Service offers schools an audit and training programme, ‘Supporting the Social, Emotional and Mental Health of Your School’ focussed on promoting a whole school approach through promoting strong, trusting relationships, recognising behaviour as a form of communication, maintaining clear boundaries and expectations around behaviour, engaging and involving parents in addressing and planning support for learners’ SEMH needs and developing a shared vision across school informed by listening to and empowering all staff.

9.4 Training programmes offered are tailored to school needs. The menu includes restorative approaches to behaviour, promoting staff well-being, attachment theory and nurture principles, using and applying the Boxall Profile (framework for assessing SEMH needs) and understanding autism, anxiety and challenging behaviour.

9.5 The service is also set to issue relationship policy guidance for schools to ‘provide a scaffold that can be helpful to schools as they develop their own, bespoke school relationship policy’. The guidance is based on the following principle ideas, taken from guidance developed for schools in Brighton and Hove:21  Behaviour is a form of communication  Taking a non-judgemental, curious and empathetic attitude towards behaviour  Putting relationships first  Maintaining clear boundaries and expectations around behaviour

19 Supporting the Social, Emotional and Mental Health of Your School, Rochdale Educational Psychology Service’s guidance for schools on undertaking an SEMH audit, 2019. 20 Dr Lucy Charters, Principal Educational Psychologist, Rochdale BC, Presentation at Pioneer Trust SEND Conference January 2020 21 Developing an Attachment Aware Behaviour Regulation Policy: Guidance for Brighton and Hove Schools, 2018.

 Not all behaviours are a matter of choice  Behaviour must always be viewed systematically and within the context of important relationships  Encouraging parental engagement and involvement is absolutely crucial when addressing and planning support for children and young people’s SEMH needs  A whole school approach to achieve authentic inclusion and wholehearted learning.

9.6 This relationship based approach is also rooted in a wider approach across Rochdale. The Rochdale Relationship Manifesto22, launched in 2018, states that ‘Everybody has the right to good quality relationships at home, in education, at work and in the community. People thrive when their relationships are strong and positive.’

9.7 Rochdale Virtual School is promoting and funding the Attachment Aware Schools programme, which offers training to schools and early years’ settings. ‘An attachment aware school is a place where the most vulnerable children can recover from trauma and develop resilience, where educational gaps are narrowed and where all children can thrive and fulfil their potential.’23 The approach is based on nurture principles. One of the features of the programme is to establish a core team within school who will have responsibility for adapting school policies and approaches to embed nurture principles. In Rochdale 7 schools have completed the programme and a further school is working to complete.

9.8 A nurture approach is based on Attachment Theory and the six principles of nurture reflect this:  Children's learning is understood developmentally.  The classroom offers a safe base.  Nurture is important for the development of self-esteem.  Language is understood as a vital means of communication.  All behaviour is communication.  Transitions are significant in the lives of children.

9.9 Nurture groups assess learning and social and emotional needs and give the necessary help to remove the barriers to learning. As the children learn academically and socially they develop confidence, become responsive to others, learn self-respect and take pride in behaving well and in achieving. Nurture groups are founded on evidence-based practices and offer a short-term, inclusive, focused intervention that works in the long term.

9.10 National research indicates that nurture groups are successful in significantly improving long term mental health, academic attainment and attendance for pupils with social, emotional and mental health needs. The Nurture Group Network24 has pulled together evidence from over 100 studies and found that children with SEMH needs made significantly more improvement in social and emotional functioning, academic attainment and attendance by participating in nurture groups rather than their mainstream classroom.

22 A ‘Rochdale Relationships Matter’ Manifesto for the Rochdale Borough 2018-20, Rochdale Borough Council. 23 Attachment Friendly Schools presentation, Middlesbrough Virtual School 24 https://www.nurtureuk.org/sites/default/files/nurture_groups_booklet_online.pdf

9.11 In many parts of the UK there has been substantial investment in nurture groups and extensive evaluation of their impact. Croydon, a Local Authority in South London, has developed a system wide approach to nurture with provision covering a continuum from universal (whole school) to acute (highly complex). This offers a useful way to conceptualise embedding nurture principles across both individual schools and the wider education community.

Croydon Nurture

Universal Vulnerable Complex Acute A nurturing approach in Nurturing provision Full time nurturing Nurture Plus (typically schools evident in for part of the school provision SEN resourced ethos, behaviour and day aimed at provision or PRU policies developing social skills managed and emotional interventions) awareness

9.12 Further details on implementation and case studies from Croydon schools including the Primary Short Stay School can be found in ‘Promoting a nurturing approach in Croydon’s primary schools’, LBC and Octavo Partnership, 2016.25 See also the description of the characteristics of each level of provision at Appendix C.

GOOD PRACTICE EXAMPLE Case studies showing impact of Attachment Aware Schools Programme at Kingsway High School and Howard Park Primary

25 https://www.croydon.gov.uk/sites/default/files/articles/downloads/Nurture%20pack%20Oct%202015.pdf

10 A PREVENTATIVE PUPIL REFERRAL SERVICE OFFER

4. Redefine the role of Brownhill Learning Community to work flexibly with schools to reduce the incidence of exclusions and ensure pupils at risk of exclusion are supported early through preventative interventions 4a Separate PRU and specialist provision at Brownhill and relaunch both provisions; refocus special school intake to pupils with SEMH needs 4b Set up a preventative programme for secondary school pupils at risk of exclusion (assessment, respite, outreach) and secure additional premises to accommodate extended offer 4c Consider feasibility of locality based PRS provision to facilitate safeguarding of pupils and reduce travel times: Middleton / Heywood and Pennine / Rochdale 4d Develop alternatives to exclusion for primary schools, enabled through locality based assessment and nurture provision 4e Develop a learning base for pupils not currently accessing their full entitlement, including young people supported through the Youth Justice system 4f Commission a wider AP offer

10.1 One of the key issues that Rochdale is seeking to address is high rates of both fixed term and permanent exclusion, particularly of pupils with SEN Support plans, for the most part triggered by persistent disruptive behaviour (see paragraphs 4.29 and 4.30). While previous sections of this report have focussed on the offer in schools, this section will look at the role the Pupil Referral Service (PRS) can play in enabling schools to meet the needs of pupils whose behaviour in school is frequently challenging, making exclusion ‘the last resort’.

10.2 The PRS is federated with a community Special School and operates across 3 sites in central Rochdale and Heywood as the Brownhill Learning Community. There is an executive head teacher responsible for the full range of provision including home tuition and a deputy head teacher leading the staff teams at each of the three sites. The schools share a management committee / governing body. The school and PRS have separate DfE numbers and are therefore inspected separately although the provision is to a large degree integrated across the sites. Both provisions are mixed; there are significantly more boys than girls although demand for places for girls is increasing. The special school caters for children and young people aged 7-16, principally with SEMH although with an increasing cohort of pupils with ASC, while the PRS supports pupils from age 4 -16 excluded from school and placed by the Local Authority.

10.3 The Brownhill Learning Community has been judged by Ofsted to be good across all measures. Relationships with schools are excellent, characterised by a high level of trust and co-operation.

10.4 The leadership team at Brownhill is passionate about improving outcomes of the most disadvantaged children and young people in the borough. As demand for specialist and PRU places has increased the head teacher has worked closely with the Local Authority and schools to put in place provision that meets local needs. This flexibility and creative approach has been very successful in meeting short term patterns of demand but, in combination with high levels of permanent exclusion from secondary schools, has resulted in the Brownhill Learning Community no longer having the capacity to use its expertise, as it would wish, to support schools with interventions to reduce exclusion.

10.5 The loose federation of the SEMH special school (previously requiring improvement) and the PRS was initiated in 2007 to offer the school the same high quality leadership from which the PRS had benefitted. Recruitment to the leadership of educational provision for pupils with very challenging behaviours is from a limited pool of skilled, experienced and dedicated staff. The current executive head teacher is reaching the age for retirement and she is acutely aware of the need to plan for her succession. This situation poses a threat but also offers an opportunity to think strategically with the current head teacher about reshaping provision to meet current and future need and to structure the provision and associated responsibilities to maximise the likelihood of a strong leadership appointment when required.

10.6 The current pupil cohort has increased significantly in number over the past 5 years.  At the last census in January 2019 there were 112 pupils on the roll of the PRS, almost double the number (68) in January 2015 and with numbers of primary aged pupils increasing over the last 2 years.

Numbers of pupils on roll of PRS January 2019

YR 11 YR 10 YR 9 YR 8 YR 7 YR 6 YR 5 YR 4 YR 3 YR 2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

 At the last census in January 2019 there were 74 pupils on the roll of the Brownhill Special School, a lower rate of increase compared to 2015 when there were 62 pupils on roll.

Numbers of pupils on roll of Special School January 2019

YR 11 YR 10 YR 9 YR 8 YR 7 YR 6 YR 5 YR 4 YR 3 YR 2 YR 1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

 The increase in numbers in the special school is made up of pupils with EHCPs citing ASC as their primary need.

Primary Need: SEMH/BESD or ASD over last 5 years

2018-19

2017-18

2016-17

2015-16

2014-15

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

SEMH BESD ASD

10.7 The special school and PRS provision is integrated across the three sites which constitute the Brownhill Learning Community. Heights Lane in central Rochdale provides for all pupils at Key Stage 4, while Darnhill in Heywood provides for all primary pupils referred through the local authority as well as secondary pupils who have been diagnosed for ASC and for 'vulnerable pupils' placed by the local authority. Pupils referred by the Local Authority in Key Stage 3 are educated at the Saxon Hall site. Both the Heights Lane and Darnhill sites are purpose built schools although lacking some specialist facilities, such as sensory rooms, normally found in ASC settings, while Saxon Hall is a very cramped repurposed building, which despite the considerable efforts of the staff team to use it effectively, including the creation of small vocational learning spaces, is unsuitable for use as a school. All the sites are operating at capacity, with restructuring having taken place prior to the current school year to ensure that the largest cohorts of pupils are accommodated where there is most space (this has meant relocating both KS 3 and 4).

10.8 The most recent Ofsted report of the PRS highlights the strengths of provision for excluded pupils:

 “You and your colleagues ensure that you gather information about pupils when they join the school. You use this information well to determine and address the key barriers to academic success for each pupil. As a result, a number of pupils are very quickly ready to return to mainstream schooling.

 Almost all the pupils who join your school have experienced considerable disruption to their education. At the Year 11 Centre, staff are relentless in their drive to ensure that pupils move on to education, employment or training. The team’s pragmatic approach to making sure that pupils gain the qualifications they need to secure a place at college pays dividends. The vast majority of your pupils move on to post-16 provision successfully.

 You make good use of the opportunities created through the federation between Brownhill School and Rochdale Pupil Referral Unit. For example, by combining the two cohorts of Year 11 pupils, you have been able to offer a broader and more balanced curriculum. Pupils can now work towards a wide range of nationally recognised qualifications, as well as gain workplace experience. This stands them in good stead to gain a place at college on a course of their choice.”

10.9 Case studies demonstrate creative solutions to managing learning for individual pupils.

CASE STUDIES J is a pupil currently in year 11 at Brownhill. He was referred to Brownhill in year 7 by his secondary school – he was unable to function in a secondary classroom environment and had difficulty making friends among his peer group. His needs were assessed and an EHC plan agreed. Sadly J continued to struggle in a school setting and exhibited aggressive and controlling behaviour, which staff at Brownhill found difficult to manage. Given his family experience of significant domestic violence, it was decided at his year 9 review that a therapeutic approach in a non-school setting might help him to manage his emotions and interactions. He began a part time work experience placement at Pastures New, which specialises in equine assisted therapy. J’s time at Pastures New has increased as he has progressed and his programme there includes English GCSE and Maths level 1. He plans to go to college in September to take a small animal care course.

M is in year 11 at a Rochdale secondary school. He was referred to Brownhill in year 7, following a permanent exclusion. Staff at Brownhill identified M’s learning needs and supported him to develop confidence in his capabilities. They also worked closely with his family, ensuring they received the support they needed. M was successfully reintegrated into school at the beginning of year 9 with a package of support from Brownhill in the first few weeks ensuring that he progressed quickly from part-time to full time attendance at his new school. M is now a prefect.

10.10 Senior leaders at Brownhill are acutely aware, however, of the constraints on their offer and would wish to use their expertise to work more flexibly with schools on a more preventative approach for pupils to enable to succeed in mainstream school with a specialist intervention at the appropriate point. This might include:

 assessment provision for pupils struggling to manage in mainstream education

 flexible provision for pupils at risk of exclusion

 reintegration support for pupils returning to mainstream education

For primary school pupils this would ideally be delivered in a mainstream locality setting as part of primary nurture provision.

10.11 Schools will need to work closely with staff at Brownhill if the introduction of a preventative PRS offer is to have any impact on reducing the numbers of pupils who are permanently excluded from school. Recent research26 commissioned by the DfE into early identification of pupils at risk of being referred to AP through to reintegrating pupils into mainstream provision identified key elements that contribute to successful reintegration. “These included good communication between the AP, the school, the pupil and the parent/carer, setting clear academic and behavioural targets for the pupil, phased (part-time) reintegration, and additional support and mentoring for (and monitoring of) the pupil. AP providers were found to be keen to remain involved in supporting the pupil after they returned to mainstream school and felt this could play a key part in successful reintegration, but some struggled to resource this.”

10.12 In the long term a reduced number of exclusions would allow the PRS to refocus its resources on prevention and reintegration; in the short to medium term, however, a wider PRS offer would clearly need to be additionally resourced. A dual registration approach with a clear contract between schools and the PRS would need to underpin the arrangement with schools either funding individual interventions for specific pupils from their AWPU and SEN Support funds or agreeing initially to share the funding of some pilot provision.

10.13 Refocussing the PRU offer to favour prevention would require a review of the protocols governing the fair access and managed moves processes. This could include redirecting funds from permanent exclusion to integration packages to support schools receiving ‘hard to place’ pupils.

10.14 A further issue In Rochdale is the lack of a range of high quality Alternative Provision (AP) other than the PRS. In addition to helping ease demand pressures, a wider range of settings would make it easier for the inclusion panels to match provision to the individual needs of students. A wider range of AP would also enable the Local Authority to place pupils involved in incidents of conflict into separate provisions. Currently this is difficult to manage at Brownhill and can in some cases constitute a safeguarding issue.

10.15 Proposals for reshaping provision at Brownhill need to consider whether a locality based offer is feasible. As well as strengthening safeguarding, this would have the benefit of reducing

26 Investigative Research into Alternative Provision, DfE, October 2018

daily travel times journeys for pupils who are being educated in sites located at a distance from their local communities.

10.16 Brownhill also has responsibility for very vulnerable pupils with anxiety or school phobia or who are educated at home because of their medical needs. Currently 33 young people are receiving a part-time programme of home tuition, of whom 32 suffer from anxiety, have ASC or are emotionally based school refusers; only one current pupil has a medical need. There is no dedicated resource base for these pupils, meaning that it is difficult to deliver a broad curriculum including blended learning and the gradual introduction of social interaction in a protected environment. While the Saxon Hall site is not suitable for full-time educational provision, it could be a useful resource to improve provision for this group of pupils and deliver their full educational entitlement.

Implementation Issues 10.14 The key challenge to implementing these recommendations will be addressing the need for appropriate accommodation, both in terms of identifying suitable sites and the capital funding for any construction or refurbishment.

10.15 While the ideal solution would be the development of an additional site, it may be that alternatives need to be considered. These could include:  developing a full-time year 11 vocational offer at Hopwood Hall College (based on a successful precedent in Bury) that would free up one of the Brownhill sites  exploring the daytime use of youth centres for elements of the PRS programme (Spring Vale in Middleton is already used for some home tuition while Moss Street hosts a project aimed at preventing youth crime).

10.16 Primary schools have limited space for locating new provision. One option would be to consider schools with former Sure Start Centres for primary nurture provision or for SEN resourced provision.

11 A CONTINUUM OF SEND PROVISION

5. Develop a continuum of staged specialist provision informed by a specialist place planning process that draws on regularly updated data on demand trends 5a Produce a commissioning strategy for SEND

5b Develop a business case for investment in new provision and enhancing the quality of existing settings (specialist and PRS)

5c Set up SEN resource and nurture bases (number TBD) in mainstream schools to create an intermediate step between mainstream and special school for pupils with ASC and SEMH needs 5d Plan for matching pupils to new range of provision 5e Consider further expansion to existing special schools (multi-site) or encouraging further free school bids to create additional specialist provision

11.1 A continuum of provision to meet a continuum of needs is an essential part of the framework for delivering a graduated response to children with SEND. The Rochdale Special Educational Needs and Disability Strategy 0-25 for 2017-2019 sets out an overarching vision for ‘a well-planned continuum of provision from birth to age 25 years in Rochdale that meets the needs of children and young people with SEND and their parents / carers.‘

11.2 A full continuum of provision ranges from mainstream schools to specialist settings (special schools that meet the needs of some pupils with the most complex and severe needs) with SEN resourced provision providing an intermediate stage to enable some pupils to access both specialist support and mainstream classes. At a school level this means an effective graduated response and at a borough level flexible provision pathways with staged support that enable pupils to access the most appropriate level of specialist provision to meet their individual needs at any point in time; this includes the flexibility to step up or step down the support provided as needs change.

11.3 The Children and Families Act 2014 continues the presumption in favour of mainstream schooling set out in the 1996 Education Act. Rochdale aims to maximise the opportunities for inclusion and wherever possible pupils are educated locally in a mainstream setting. Across the country the capacity of mainstream schools, in terms of experience and confidence, to meet the needs of children with special educational needs and disabilities has increased significantly in recent years. There are now more children than ever with complex and significant barriers to learning who, with carefully planned support, are making both expected and above expected academic and social progress in their local mainstream school. This is reflected in the above average number of pupils with EHC plans educated in primary and secondary schools in the borough (see paragraph 4.16) and the positive outcomes achieved (see paragraph 4.18) and contributes positively to the Rochdale score on the Educational Inclusion Index (see paragraph 4.44).

11.4 The Rochdale SEN Service is structured and resourced to support inclusion. All Early Years settings are inclusive and supported by a centrally employed Area SENCO team. The Rochdale Additional Needs Service (RANS) provides specialist support to schools to meet a wide range of special educational needs including ASC, hearing impairment, visual impairment, physical

disabilities and speech, language and communication needs. Educational Psychologists work with schools to help support children with special educational needs; each school has an allocated amount of time and services are also purchased by schools.

Rochdale Special School and Resourced Provision Sites

Resourced provision

11.5 SEN resourced provisions are designed for students with EHC plans, who would benefit from specialist provision, yet have the opportunity to access main stream schools for part of their learning. Rochdale has 4 resourced provisions as part of its continuum of special educational provision, two in primary schools and two in secondary schools. This is a small number compared to many other Local Authorities, which have invested significantly in recent years in this intermediate stage of provision.

11.6 A resourced provision is an integral part of the provision made by a school. Pupils who attend resourced provisions are placed there by the Local Authority according to the specific remit of the individual provision, and the number of available places. Whilst admission processes are different to the rest of the school, and a different funding methodology applies, Governors are responsible for the provision made as all the pupils are on the roll of the school. Ofsted inspections consider the progress made by pupils who access resourced provision, and the quality of their teaching and learning, in the same way as they will for all pupils in the school. Staff appointed to work in resourced provisions are appointed by the school, typically with advice from an appropriate Local Authority officer or specialist professional often a Special School senior leader.

11.7 While there may be some variation between Local Authorities, schools that are commissioned to offer resourced provision are typically those with:

 full support from the Governing Body and school leadership team for incorporating resourced provision into the school;  a good or outstanding judgement from Ofsted;  evidence of good practice in the successful inclusion of pupils with a range of special educational needs;  suitable physical space, and building adaptations appropriate to the needs of the pupils attending the provision;  size that will make it feasible to integrate the provision required;  a location that enables attendance by pupils from a wider geographical area (than the school’s normal intake area).

11.8 A review of the effectiveness of resourced provision for pupils with SLI and ASC in the City of Manchester undertaken by a team from Manchester University in 2015 identified the following success factors, which may be useful in considering expanding the number of resourced provisions:

 Joint planning for admissions between Local Authority schools;  An audit of current pupil needs to help to identify current gaps and areas for potential future development;  A system for collecting data on current and future need to assist in future provision planning;  Information for schools and parents about the resource provisions and their admission criteria to ensure a shared understanding of the resource provision remit and role;

 Clarity regarding schools’ expected core offer for children with ASD/SLI and how they can access support to ensure they are able to provide this;  A programme of induction and on-going training for all staff in the resource provision schools, with more specialised training available for resource provision staff;  Clarity regarding the outreach roles of the special school and resource provision;  Opportunities for sharing of expertise across resource provisions;  Joint working between resource provision teams and colleagues in mainstream classes.

Special Schools

11.9 Rochdale has 4 Special schools. All have expanded over recent years to meet rising demand and are operating at capacity. All four special schools are judged to be good by Ofsted. Expertise within the Special Schools is highly valued and could be used more extensively than is currently the case to plan strategically and guide and support the development of resourced provision.

11.10 There are two 116 place primary special schools, each catering for a full range of SEN (other than SEMH). Primary aged pupils requiring a special school place attend their most local of the two schools. Springside in central Rochdale (north and east planning areas) has more pupils with PMLD and less with SLCN than Newlands, while Newlands (south and west) has more pupils with MLD.

11.11 Progression from the two primary special schools is to Redwood School, which has 290 places for pupils from 11-19 with multiple and complex needs. Redwood has a dedicated post 16 vocational provision: the Redwood real work project is designed to inspire students, to develop confidence, independence and employability skills through a range of stimulating experiences and includes an internship programme where 62% of interns gain either paid or voluntary employment In Rochdale.

11.12 Pupils with SEMH needs requiring a specialist place are placed at the Brownhill Learning Community. These are mostly secondary aged pupils but there is also a small group of primary aged pupils. As already indicated (see paragraph 10.6), a small but increasing cohort of secondary pupils with ASC has also been placed at Brownhill.

Independent and non-maintained specialist placements

11.13 All the special schools in the borough are currently full and 75 pupils are travelling to educational provision outside the borough.

11.14 While some pupils with the most complex needs will require highly specialised settings that cannot be provided locally, the majority could benefit from local provision if this were to be available. Indeed, historically the numbers educated out of borough have been very low (2.9% in 2018, compared to the national average of 4.9%). These are now increasing as the number of EHC plans grows. Given that EHC plans now cover young adults up to the age of 25, pre-16 and post-16 numbers in independent or non-maintained provision are both increasing.

Number of Pupils 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2017-19 percentage increase Independent Pre 16 21 33 39 86% NMSS Pre 16 9 13 12 33% Independent Post 16 5 7 9 80% NMSS Post 16 9 8 7 -22% TOTAL 44 61 67 52% : Numbers of Pre-16 and Post-16 pupils at Independent and Non-maintained special schools

Provision pathways for different types of SEN

11.15 An SEN pathway is another way of describing a graduated response to meeting pupils’ special educational needs. Needs are often multiple and complex and the support provided should be multi-faceted and scalable, capable of being intensified or stepped down as needs change or pupils make progress.

Hearing Impairment, Visual Impairment and Physical Disabilities

11.16 For pupils with Hearing Impairment (HI), Visual Impairment (VI) and Physical Disabilities (PD), staged provision and high levels of integration are well embedded. Support is provided to mainstream school settings by the RANS service. SEN Resourced provision for pupils with HI are at Marland Hill Primary School and Mathew Moss High School, and Wardle Academy has similar provision for pupils with Physical Disabilities and complex medical needs, enabling pupils with specialist support needs to access a full curriculum. In addition Rochdale has made very effective use of school accessibility funding and is ranked third most inclusive Local Authority in England for accessibility. There is very little demand for out of borough specialist provision.

Autism and Social Communication Needs

11.17 A higher proportion of pupils with ASC are educated in mainstream settings in Rochdale with (18.8% in Primary schools and 19.5% in Secondary schools, compared to an England average of 7.3% and 9.7% respectively). Support to meet the needs of pupils with ASC within the mainstream is provided by a dedicated team within the RANS service. A primary resourced provision with 8 places and room to expand opened in April 2019 at Shawclough Primary School. There is currently no secondary resourced provision for pupils to progress to. All four special schools offer places to pupils with ASC and a growing number (44 in 2018) are travelling out of borough to schools in the non-maintained and independent sectors. In addition, Rochdale has 6 ASD pupils being home tutored through the PRS and a further 8 secondary aged ASD pupils who are being Electively Home Educated. The borough has successfully bid for a new specialist free school with 75 places for pupils aged 11-19 with ASC and SLCN. This is due to open in 2021 and will provide further capacity to meet the increasing demand for specialist places for pupils with ASC. Current opportunities post-16 include the REAL work programme at Redwood.

Social, Emotional and Mental Health Needs

11.18 The majority of pupils with SEMH needs are educated in mainstream schools. While some schools offer nurture provision, including for pupils with SEMH, the Local Authority does not currently commission any resourced provision for SEMH. While designated specialist provision is at Brownhill School (currently 36 pupils), a small numbers of pupils (10) attending Redwood have SEMH recorded as their primary need. 21 pupils are travelling to out of borough provision in the independent sector. Opportunities for progression at 16 are limited.

Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties

11.19 Rochdale has a higher than expected number of pupils with PMLD educated in Special schools (10.3% compared to North West 7.3% and 6.9% in England). There is currently only 1 pupil educated out of borough in the independent sector. Between October and December 2019 there

were 7 pupils with PMLD who had EHCP’s opened in Secondary Phase, suggesting undiagnosed SEN within families moving into the borough.

11.20 A key issue is the limited provision of nursing support Clarify with MK …….

Future planning to meet demand

11.21 Both the 2016 SEND inspection and local authority data have identified Autism as the most significant SEND issue within Rochdale. The following analysis was provided to the DfE in support of the successful bid in 2018 to expand specialist provision for pupils with ASC27.

11.22 ‘The numbers of ASC diagnoses have risen almost 3 fold in Rochdale from 200 in 2014 to above 500 in 2018 in Primary year groups.. On average there are 13 more pupils with ASD as their Primary need (including both EHCP and SEN Support) in each primary year group than in each Secondary year group (Gov SFR). Rochdale places 45% of its EHCP pupils in special schools, which is well below the national average of 49%, Greater Manchester LA’s average of 52% or the neighbouring LA, Oldham, which has 54% of its EHCP children in specialist provision (Gov SFR). ‘

11.23 The borough’s Autism Strategy 0-2528 identifies the following priorities for the commissioning of provision for ASC:  ‘Develop specialist provision within schools to encourage mainstream management of ASC;  Develop more specialist in borough placements and educational places to avoid high costs.’

11.24 This is reflected in the borough’s SEN capital fund plan 2018-2021, which identifies ‘a gap in provision for primary and secondary school children with ASC who are able to access a mainstream curriculum but struggle with the mainstream environment.’ The plan commits to developing two resourced provisions in the first instance (the first already opened at Shawclough Primary School). It also states that ‘it is hoped to use the model developed at Shawclough with other primary schools in the borough to increase capacity further and in an attempt to educate children as close to their own home as practical’.

11.25 The second most prevalent type of need in Rochdale, based on the breakdown of EHC plans by primary need, is Social, Emotional and Mental Health. The level of need is increasing over

27 Rochdale ASC Free school bid document 2018 28 Rochdale Borough Integrated Children and Young People’s 0-25 Autism Strategy including Social Communication Needs, 2017

time, particularly in primary schools. However, Rochdale assesses considerably less pupils overall as having SEMH needs compared with the North West region and England - 13.4% in primary schools (NW 15.5%, England 16.3%), 14% in secondary schools (NW 19.7%, England 19.6%) and Special 8.9% (NW 14.5%, England 12.8%).

% pupils with SEMH by School % Pupils with SEMH by School School

25 20 15 10 5 0 Primary Secondary Special

Primary Secondary Special Rochdale North West England

11.26 The borough’s SEN Capital Fund plan 2018-21 identifies a gap in provision for children with SEMH ‘who are able to access a mainstream curriculum but struggle with the mainstream environment’. It sets out an intention ‘to focus on SEMH resourced provision’ and identifies collaboration with a primary school that has identified space for nurture provision and with Falinge Park High School, where adaptations to the school site have been carried out. The Local Authority is not as yet commissioning places in resourced provision for pupils with SEMH.

11.27 A strong case can be made for increasing the range and volume of SEN provision for children and young people with ASC or SEMH needs to enable them to be educated within their local communities and to reduce travel to school time where long journeys are impacting negatively on readiness for learning. It also makes economic sense in terms of reducing revenue expenditure on independent sector provision, which is often significantly more expensive than maintained provision. Rochdale, like the majority of Local Authorities across the country, has a deficit High Needs budget and will be required to produce a recovery plan from the next financial year. One strategy is likely to be cost avoidance by stemming demand for out of borough independent provision. Currently the average cost of a place in the independent sector is just over £40,000 pre-16 and £38,500 post-16, compared to £18,650 in a maintained secondary special school.

11.28 However, expanding provision is challenging. Mainstream schools in Rochdale appear to have limited space for creating resourced provision through refurbishing existing premises, which means that significant capital investment may be needed to create additional spaces.

11.29 Capital funding is difficult to access. Special Provision Capital Fund is available from 2018-21 to enable Local Authorities to create new (additional) places at good or outstanding provision, improve facilities or develop new facilities. However, despite the high level of deprivation in the borough and prevalence of SEN, Rochdale, has, like other boroughs in the region, received a comparatively low allocation (£848,837 over 3 years). The allocation is based on demographic growth and local building costs rather than prevalence of SEN.

11.30 The other route to sourcing capital to expand provision is the free school programme. Other than the dedicated SEN free school programme, which Rochdale bid to successfully, Local Authorities are not able to commission free schools. They do, however, have significant leverage and can give a strong strategic steer to organisations eligible to bid by publishing a clear SEND capital strategy and developing or sustaining strong local and regional partnerships.

CASE STUDIES

Impact on outcomes for pupils in SEN resourced provision

George at Shawclough,

Girl at Marland Hill

MK to provide

11 STRATEGIC ACCOUNTABILITY

6. Improve strategic accountability for the effectiveness of provision with regular performance monitoring of a comprehensive range of PIs 6a Develop a comprehensive performance dashboard drawing together data on outcomes for pupils with SEN support and EHC plans with data on the SEN statutory process and cohort profile and placements 6b Full dashboard to be reviewed by CWD Partnership Board and CYP Partnership Board

6c School data to include contextual information

11.1 Strong governance and partnership arrangements are in place to ensure Rochdale delivers on its commitment to inclusion. Accountability is through the Children with Disabilities Partnership and the Children and Young People Partnership Board, both of which have representation from a wide range of partners including parents and carers.

11.2 Partnerships between schools are strong. Secondary schools have established a cooperative venture, the Pioneer Trust, ‘to ensure that all young people across Rochdale Borough have access to high quality education …. its main purpose is to be a self-improving education system able to rigorously self-evaluate, and collectively support and challenge each other through a school-to- school improvement model involving other partners and the Local Authority.’ Membership includes Redwood School, the Brownhill Learning Community, Hopwood Hall College and Rochdale Sixth Form College.

11.3 School to school partnerships between primary schools are through collaboratives, groups of 12-14 schools, to which the majority of Rochdale primary schools, including the two primary special schools, belong. A series of task and finish groups with head teacher and Local Authority representation are working on a range of issues linked to increasing inclusion within the borough: SEND, NQT training, Safeguarding and Early Help, Admissions, Attendance and Fair Access and Transition.

11.4 An open and honest relationship exists between the Local Authority and schools with a commitment to working together to tackle difficult issues. A recent Pioneer Trust conference focused on improving outcomes for pupils with SEND and a cross phase task and finish group is overseeing the development of the borough’s inclusion strategy.

11.5 Within the Local Authority there is a need to strengthen links across services where collaboration between teams is not yet sufficiently embedded. The development of an overarching inclusion strategy to include SEND provides an opportunity to establish a clear accountability framework with specific responsibilities for all relevant service teams.

11.6 One of the challenges for local areas, given the wide range of accountabilities in the current education environment, is to maintain a comprehensive understanding of the outcomes of all elements of provision. Following the introduction of SEND reforms in September 2014, the DfE

published an accountability framework29 with a proposed set of key indicators to enable the progress and impact of the SEND reforms to be monitored at a local and national level, as set out in the table which follows.

11.7 Rochdale, as other Local Authorities, collects a wide range of data on SEND and on wider inclusion indicators, for example relating to educational outcomes for Children Looked After and all areas of Children’s Services are subject to regular performance surgeries where data is interrogated to identify issues and areas for improvement. Data dashboards are also presented to the Children with Disabilities Partnership Board and the Children and Young People’s Partnership. There are, however, weaknesses in the analysis and presentation of data in some service areas and there is no cross-cutting data dashboard either for SEND or to provide an overview of Inclusion and to facilitate target setting to drive improvement. The current practice of analysing data on a monthly basis is extremely useful for operational decision-making but an

29 Special Educational Needs and Disability: Supporting Local and National Accountability, DfE, March 2015

annual picture based on a fixed point in time is also needed in order to demonstrate trends and benchmark against regional and national comparators.

11.8 The range of quantitative data sources capable of analysis by SEN presented overleaf is based on a DfE publication30 and may be useful in building a comprehensive strategic dashboard.

Topic Data sets Analysis Trend Comparators Frequency Accountable by SEN data Prevalence and Type of need Characteristics of SEN Support / EHCP SEND School types Attainment EYFSP Phonics Screening Check KS1, KS2, KS4 Post 16 – attainment by age 19 Progress KS1-2 Progress 8 Post 16 Participation at age 16 and Participation and 17 Destinations Destinations Absence and Persistent Absence Exclusion Overall Absence Permanent and Fixed Term Exclusion Experience of the Timeliness of issuing EHCP SEND System Appeals registered with SEND Tribunal

11.9 In developing a strategic dashboard it is important to consider the purpose for which data is to be used, for example while monthly data on EHCPs by type of need are useful for informing in- year placement decisions, regular annual trend data will enable the borough to forecast future demand and make school place planning decisions. For each indicator the presentation should include data source and date, benchmarking information where available, a named accountable manager, a brief comment from the performance team (for example: latest data available currently March 2019 shows performance level continues to be above target although it is lower than the same period last year) and space for the accountable manager to provide a brief narrative from a service perspective.

11.10 It is recognised that there have been some difficulties in accessing current data during this project due to the change in software in December from Capita to Liquid Logic and the need for performance staff to focus on managing a large scale data transfer to ensure the continuity of basic information for services to function efficiently. It has not, therefore, been possible to fully understand the capacity and capability of performance teams to deliver a more strategic approach to data and whether a more integrated approach is hampered by the current service structure. It is, however, the role of accountable managers to identify data requirements clearly, clarifying the purpose of each report, and to collaborate on building a comprehensive system-wide overview.

30 Special Educational Needs: An Analysis and Summary of Data Sources, DfE, November 2015

11.11 Data sharing agreements are in place to enable the Local Authority to share schools data between schools at each phase. This is useful in enabling peer support and challenge. Schools have, however, expressed a concern that data is not accompanied by contextual information on schools circumstances, for example the level of SEN in the school population or numbers of in- year admissions.

11.12 There is currently no data sharing protocol with health making it difficult for live birth information to be used to enable early identification of babies and children with the likelihood of lifelong learning support needs. Workarounds are available but further exploration at a strategic level would be helpful.

GOOD PRACTICE EXAMPLE

GM SEND Interactive Dashboard

Developed by the Research and Strategy team at the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, this dashboard has been created to cover the key indicators within the SEND accountability framework. It runs through a software package, which sources national data and presents comparisons between GM boroughs on each indicator. There is also a facility for individual boroughs to select statistical neighbours as comparators. The presentation is clear and, if maintained appropriately, will provide instant up-to-date snapshots for boroughs.

12 REFERENCES

Data sources

 Special Educational Needs in England: 2019. DfE, January 2019  Statements of SEN and EHC Plans: England 2019, DfE, May 2019  Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions in England: 2017 to 2018, DfE, July 2019  Pupil Absence in Schools in England: 2017 to 2018, DfE, March 2019  Level 2 and 3 attainment by young people aged 19 in 2018, DfE, April 2019  Rochdale Borough Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2017-18  Rochdale Borough Locality Plan: Equalities Impact Assessment 2017  Rochdale Local Authority Health Profile 2018, Public Health England, July 2018  North West Children’s Services: contextualised performance data 2019, presentation to NWADCS  Special Educational Needs: an analysis and summary of data sources, DfE, November 2015  Inclusion Series, MIME 2019, www.mimeconsulting.co.uk

National policy guidance

 Special Educational Needs and Disability: Supporting Local and National Accountability, DfE, March 2015  Timpson Review of School Exclusion, DfE, May 2019  The Timpson Review of School Exclusion: Government Response, DfE, May 2019

Research  The 1001 Critical Days – The importance of conception to age 2 period, The Wave Trust, 2014  Investigative Research into Alternative Provision, DfE, October 2018  Alarming Effects of Children’s Exposure to Domestic Violence, Psychology Today, Feb 26 2019  Jane Lewis, Ann Mooney, Louca-Mai Brady, Chloe Gill, Amanda Henshall, Natasha Willmott, Charlie Owen, Kate Evans and June Statham (2010) Special Educational Needs and Disability. Understanding Local Variation in Prevalence, Service Provision and Support. DCSF Research Report DCSF-RR211(p35)

Local reports and strategies

 Joint Local Area Inspection in Rochdale, Ofsted and CQC, November 2016  Rochdale SEND Strategy 0-25 for 2017-19  Report to Children and Young People with Disabilities Strategic Partnership Board, Dec 2019  Reducing Exclusions for young people with SEND, Positive Steps, Sept 2018  SEND Support and Funding in Rochdale Mainstream Schools and Academies, RBC, Sept 2018  Rochdale Relationships Matter Manifesto  Rochdale ASC Free Scool bid document 2018  Rochdale Borough Integrated Children and Young People’s 0-25 Autism Strategy including Social Communication Needs, 2017

Appendix 1: A note on SEND data

SEND pupil data sets describe two overlapping populations:

- Pupils with SEND attending Rochdale schools and draws on the annual schools census31. This captures information from schools on all pupils with SEN (those with EHC plans and on SEN support) and includes pupils placed in Rochdale schools by other local authorities. - Data held by the borough on pupils with EHC plans issued by Rochdale.32 This data is also submitted annually to the DfE and, as well as showing pupils placed by Rochdale in the borough’s schools, this data set includes pupils placed by Rochdale in maintained and independent provision outside the borough.

For the purpose of school place planning the population of resident pupils for whom Rochdale is responsible for issuing an EHCP plan and making appropriate provision is more relevant.

31 Special Educational Needs in England: 2019. DfE, January 2019

32 Statements of SEN and EHC Plans: England 2019, DfE, May 2019

Appendix 2: ACTION PLAN