House of Commons Education Committee Special educational needs and disabilities First Report of Session 2019–20 HC 20 House of Commons Education Committee Special educational needs and disabilities First Report of Session 2019–20 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 16 October 2019 HC 20 Published on 23 October 2019 by authority of the House of Commons The Education Committee The Education Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Education and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Robert Halfon MP (Conservative, Harlow) (Chair) Lucy Allan MP (Conservative, Telford) Ben Bradley MP (Conservative, Mansfield) Marion Fellows MP (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw) James Frith MP (Labour, Bury North) Emma Hardy MP (Labour, Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) Trudy Harrison MP (Conservative, Copeland) Ian Mearns MP (Labour, Gateshead) Lucy Powell MP (Labour (Co-op), Manchester Central) Thelma Walker MP (Labour, Colne Valley) Mr William Wragg MP (Conservative, Hazel Grove) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019. This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/copyright. Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/education-committee and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Gary Calder (Senior Media Officer), Chloë Cockett (Committee Specialist), Vanessa Donhowe (Committee Specialist), Mike Everett (Second Clerk), Natalie Flanagan (Senior Committee Assistant), Oliver Florence (Media Officer), Rosemary Hill (Committee Specialist), Kandirose Payne- Messias (Committee Support Apprentice), Daniel Schlappa (Assistant Clerk) and Richard Ward (Clerk). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Education Committee, House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 2370; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]. You can follow the Committee on Twitter using @CommonsEd Special educational needs and disabilities 1 Contents Summary 3 Part 1: Our report 5 What we did 6 The aims and objectives of part 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014 6 The Committee’s inquiry and report 7 Developments since the launch of the inquiry 9 What we think 11 The 2014 reforms, their implementation and their legacy 11 From vicious cycle to virtuous circle 15 CPD: crucial professional development 17 Navigating the treacle of bureaucracy 18 Limiting factors 19 (A lack of) Ambition for our young adults 20 Working together 22 A high quality and ambitious local offer 24 Back to the future 25 Part 2: Our evidence 27 Implementation 28 The wider world 28 Implementation grant 30 Legislation 31 Transition from Statements to Education Health and Care Plans 31 SEN Support 32 Post-19 33 Local offer 35 The role of health and social care 36 Accountability structures 38 Holding to account 38 Mechanisms for resolving disagreements 40 Experience 42 The wider experience 42 SEN Support 44 Education health and care plans 46 Schools and colleges 47 Local authorities 51 Children, young people and their parents and carers 53 Health and social care 56 Schools and colleges 57 Local authorities 59 Health and social care 61 Children, young people and their parents and carers 63 Post-16 and Post-19 education 65 Schools, colleges and work providers 65 Local authorities 69 Health services 71 Children, young people, parents and carers 71 Information and advice 73 Poor, misleading and unlawful advice 73 Schools and colleges 74 Local authorities 75 Children, young people, and their parents and carers 76 Adversarial experiences 78 The Tribunal Service and the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman 79 Schools and colleges 80 Local authorities 80 Children, young people and their parents and carers 81 Epilogue 83 Conclusions and recommendations 84 Appendix 1: Experiences and perspectives of individuals affected by SEND provision 90 Formal minutes 108 Witnesses 109 Published written evidence 112 List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 126 Special educational needs and disabilities 3 Summary In 2014, Parliament legislated with the intention of transforming the educational experiences of children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities. The reforms were ambitious: the Children and Families Bill sought to place young people at the heart of the system. However, as we set out in this report, that ambition remains to be realised. Let down by failures of implementation, the 2014 reforms have resulted in confusion and at times unlawful practice, bureaucratic nightmares, buck- passing and a lack of accountability, strained resources and adversarial experiences, and ultimately dashed the hopes of many. The reforms were the right ones. But their implementation has been badly hampered by poor administration and a challenging funding environment in which local authorities and schools have lacked the ability to make transformative change. The Government has recently taken initial steps to rectify the latter of these two challenges, but there is much left to be done. There is too much of a tension between the child’s needs and the provision available. The significant funding shortfall is a serious contributory factor to the failure on the part of all involved to deliver on the SEND reforms and meet children’s needs. Ultimately, however, unless we see a culture change, within schools and local authorities and the Government, any additional money will be wasted and make little difference to their lives. We have found a general lack of accountability within the system. We do not think that the current approach to accountability is sufficient—the absence of a rigorous inspection regime at the beginning set the tone of a hands-off approach. This has been perpetuated by the fact that those required, or enabled, to ‘police’ the system have been limited in part by an apparent unwillingness to grapple with unlawful practice, while others are limited by the narrowness of their remit. There must be greater oversight—we want to see a more rigorous inspection framework with clear consequences for failure. There should also be a greater focus on SEND in school inspections: at present, children who receive SEN Support are being let down by schools failing to meet their needs at this level. The Department did not need to preside serenely over chaos for five years to see that things were not quite going as planned. We recommend that parents should be able to report directly to central Government when local authorities fail to follow processes set out in statute and guidance. The Department should create a mechanism specifically for parents and carers of children with SEND, beyond what currently exists. The distance between young people’s lived experience, their families’ struggles and Ministers’ desks is just too far. Parents and carers have to wade through a treacle of bureaucracy, full of conflict, missed appointments and despair. We want to see a neutral role introduced, the purpose of which would be to arrange meetings, co-ordinate paperwork and be a source of impartial advice to parents. We believe that this would help reduce conflict in the system and remove much of the responsibility that seems to fall on parents’ shoulders. 4 Special educational needs and disabilities We have found that many local authorities are struggling with the reforms, and in some cases this has led to unlawful practice. However, they are also struggling against the tide of unintended consequences of policy decisions. We pass no judgement on the merits of the Department’s free school policy, but current restrictions on a local authority’s ability to create new specialist settings does nothing to improve the educational experiences of young people with SEND and leads to more pupils entering the independent sector at significant cost to the taxpayer. There should be a level playing field for local authorities. During our inquiry we met young people who told us about their experiences as young people with special educational needs and disabilities. We were encouraged by their confidence, determination and humour. But we were ultimately saddened by their experiences. This generation is being let down—the reforms have not done enough to join the dots, to bring people together and to create opportunities for all young people to thrive in adulthood. There are opportunities, such as supported internships and apprenticeships, out there, and there are young people out there who want to grab them with both hands. But these opportunities are limited, and there is not sufficient support, or sufficient emphasis on enabling them to achieve their hopes and dreams. We call on the Government to establish a ministerial-led cross-departmental working group to develop more employment and training opportunities for post-16 young people. We heard that many of the eagerly anticipated initiatives are not living up to their ambition and name. The role of health providers is pivotal, but unsurprisingly, the meshing of two systems has not worked. Unless health, and social care are ‘at the table’, we are no further on, and the Education, Health and Care Plan is no more than a Statement by another name. In a similar vein, we want to see greater joint working between the health and education sectors, beginning firmly with the development of a joint outcomes framework to measure how the health aspects of support for children and young people with SEND are being delivered locally.