Paces

Support & Aspiration - Progress & Next Steps: selection of first responses

A selection of irst responses garnered from Twitter under hashtag #SEN :

Guardian article "Special needs education reform offers hope and anxiety for parents"

Ambitious About Autism "Our statement on Government’s SEN Green Paper response"

IPSEA: "Initial views on the Government's SEN Green Paper Response"

BBC News: "Special needs budgets to be controlled by parents"

Every Disabled Child Matters: "Government denies ‘single plan’ to disabled children with health and social care needs"

NASEN: SEND Green Paper:Next Steps  NASEN catches well the wider import and context and it's worth quoting in full:

"The Next Steps document should be read alongside details of some of the other significant changes that are also taking place, the proposals set out in the School Funding Reform document, the changes to the National Health Service, the raising of the participation age, the significant changes in local authorities and the growth of Academies and Free Schools, will all impact on our most vulnerable young people.

More if/as they arise.

 

 

 

 

Support and Aspiration: DfE publish 'Progress & Next Steps' document

This just published and taken straight from DfE web site:

This report sets out a summary of the key responses to the consultation questions in Support and aspiration, current progress and our further plans for the vision in the Green Paper, in which:

• children’s special educational needs are picked up early and support is routinely put in place quickly
• staff have the knowledge, understanding and skills to provide the right support for children and young people who have SEN or are disabled, wherever they are
• parents know what they can reasonably expect their local school, local college, local authority and local services to provide, without them having to fight for it
• children who would currently have a statement of SEN and young people over 16 who would have a learning difficulty assessment have an integrated assessment and a single Education, Health and Care Plan which is completed in a shorter time and without families having the stress of searching to get the support they need
• parents have greater control over the services they and their family use, with:
  • every family with an Education, Health and Care plan having the right to a personal budget for their support
  • parents whose children have an education, health and care plan having the right to seek a place at any state-funded school, whether that is a special or mainstream school, a maintained school, academy or Free School.

There's a DfE Press Release here, too.

Here is IPSEA's initial response.

Some first responses to Queen's Speech - SEN

While we wait until next week, when we are promised DfE will put some detail, here are a few first responses to the Queen's Speech. If you know of more, please leave the link in a Comment below.

Nasen (formerly the National Association for Special Educational Needs): "Nasen welcomes the announcement that proposals outlined in the Green Paper will be moved forward during this session of parliament."

Follow Your Dreams - CEO Sue Sugarman's response to the Queen's Speech: "Although I don’t see how these changes give more “choice” to families, I certainly see the benefit of making the process simpler."

IPSEA: "IPSEA welcomes the aspiration of the Government ...  However, IPSEA’s advice lines and casework are already throwing up problems in local authorities’ Pathfinder pilots of the processes which the Government intends to set out in the Children and Families Bill"

Mencap: "We now have serious concerns about the Government's desire to address the crisis in social care and move beyond the limited remit of the draft Bill. People with a learning disability and their families are increasingly unable to live full and independent lives".

Nursery World (has several quotes from other children's organisations): "Many of the proposals have been outlined by ministers previously".

ACT Now for Autism: "Act Now For Autism fears that once again children with autism, many of whom currently don't have a Statement, will continue to have their complex needs ignored"

EDCM (Every Disabled Child Matters) "Srabani Sen, EDCM Board Member: "However, we are deeply concerned by plans to restrict access .... We are concerned that this will leave many children with social care and/or health needs without support".

Scope: "We are, however, pleased that the Government has recognised the need for greater support for children and families, particularly disabled families, and plans to develop a Children and Families Bill."

NAHT (National Association of Head Teachers) Russell Hobby, general secretary: “We welcome giving parents a sense of control and choice ..."  [I have to say, don't you just love that "... sense of ... "?]

 

 

Queen's Speech & SEN - more next week

We can, next week, expect DfE Ministers to set out their detailed response to consultation on the SEND Green Paper "Support and Aspiration" and a timetable for what they are describing as the biggest reform of special education in 30 years.

In a DfE press release, accompanying the Queen's Speech to Parliament yesterday, the Minister, Sarah Teather, says, "In our Green Paper, Support and Aspiration, we set out plans for the biggest SEN reforms for 30 years – giving parents real choice and joining up health, education and social care services." (In fact, the SEND Green Paper does not set out "real choice" for parents when it comes to choice of school; as a careful reading shows, it sets out arrangements for expressing a preference; not at all the same thing, but let's not quibble here just now.)

Yesterday's Queen's Speech, which sets out the Government's proposed legislative programme for the coming year, announced "My government will propose measures to improve provision for disabled children and children with special educational needs." (Full text: Guardian)

A Children and Families Bill, to be introduced "early in 2013", will cover SEN, adoption, family law, shared parenting and the Office of the Children's Commissioner. The key measures of the SEN element will be:

• replacing SEN statements and Learning Difficulty Assessments (for 16- to 25-year-olds) with a single, simpler 0-25 assessment process and Education, Health and Care Plan from 2014
• providing statutory protections comparable to those currently associated with a statement of SEN to up to 25 in further education – instead of it being cut off at 16
• requiring local authorities to publish a local offer showing the  support available to disabled children and young people and those with SEN, and their families
• giving parents or young people with Education, Health and Care Plans the right to a personal budget for their support
• introducing mediation for disputes and trialling giving children the right to appeal if they are unhappy with their support.

The SEND Green Paper was published in March 2011. In September 2011, DfE announced arrangements for 20 'pathfinder' projects, covering 31 local authorities, to pilot the Green Paper reforms. "The interim evaluation will be published in autumn 2012 and final evaluation in 2013. The work of the pathfinders will continue to inform the changes we make to legislation through the Bill."

And that's about it. You can read more on the Department for Education website, where there are all the links mentioned above: "Children and Families Bill to give families support when they need it most".

Me? I'd like to see a Bill setting out truly radical changes in the education and upbringing of children with cerebral palsy - and I'm talking training, pedagogy and curriculum as well as the role of local authorities in assessment, provision and funding.But that's a debate for another day. Alternatively, you can read Scope's first response, in the form of a statement from CEO Richard Hawkes "Scope responds to the Queen's Speech".

We'll have to wait and see the detail. The measures for extending assessment and planning to 25 years particularly interest me, given Paces' long-standing commitment to achieving 'independent adulthood as active citizens' - and how that provision is to be funded. "Ambitious About Autism", "welcomes the commitment made in today’s Queen’s Speech to extend the legal right to educational support up to the age of 25 for young disabled people". On the other hand, these provisions need to relate to the provisions of the also-proposed draft bill to modernise adult care and support, about which Mencap has this to say "We now have serious concerns about the Government's desire to address the crisis in social care and move beyond the limited remit of the draft Bill. People with a learning disability and their families are increasingly unable to live full and independent lives".

To end this post on a positive note, then. This, which I agree with, from Mark Atkinson, Director of Campaigns, Policy and Research at Ambitious about Autism on extending entitlement to 25 years: “This reform has the potential to revolutionise the life chances of tens of thousands of young people with autism who are currently denied access to any educational opportunities beyond school."

More next week ......

David Cameron again on reducing the big state - but what of SEN?

Recently (The 3rd lesson David Cameron learned ... ), I drew attention here to statements by David Cameron in 2009; the five lessons he had learned as a parent of a disabled child. In particular: "The third lesson is that we've got to make it easier for parents to get the right education for children with disabilities" and going on to say "We're seriously looking at how we can resolve that [structural] conflict of interest so that parents don't have to enter into such a huge battle for special education." I observed that there is powerful lobby in favour of this structural conflict of interest.

David Cameron, writing in today's Daily Telegraph (We are tearing down the big state) returns to the broad theme of putting people "in control of their choices and chances in life" writing "It’s simple. I want us to end once and for all the closed state monopoly where central government decides what you get, and how you get it. In its place, I want truly open public services, where people can choose the hospitals and schools they go to, with the right information at their fingertips to make that choice ...." and he evidences education where ".... 24 free schools opened last year, and another 63 have been approved. By 2015, there will be 100,000 extra school places available. To make that choice more meaningful, parents can now express a preference for any state-funded school, even when they live outside the catchment area – and local authorities have a duty to grant such requests if there is space" (my italics).

Not yet for parents of children with SEN apparently. I have also been reading "School Funding Reform: next steps towards a fairer system" published this week by the DfE. The "new methodology for funding high need pupils" of which the DfE speaks on its consultation web page, includes a very familiar provision, the cause of many structural conflicts of interest:

".... the local authority in which the child lives ..... will continue to make decisions about the placement of pupils and students with high-level SEN or LDD based on whether the placement represents appropriate provision and an efficient use of resources." para 3.7.2 (my italics)

Indeed, the DfE is absolutely clear that its "new methodology": 

"has also been designed to operate within the current statutory frameworks that operate in these sectors in relation to assessment, commissioning, admissions and accountability. None of the funding reforms set out in this chapter would of themselves alter these existing statutory frameworks, or require such alteration in order to be implemented." para 3.2.5

In short, the DfE is not proposing a funding methodology that drives the parent choice (as a distinct from the SEN Green paper offer of parents merely stating a preference), advocated by the Prime Minister, in 2009 and now. The structural conflict remains, for now.

First report of Labour SEN review - and actually there was something interesting

Special Needs Jungle reports "Special needs experts offer views for Labour's SEN plicy review". There are no surprises, but there was indeed one something worth a moment's attention which I copy below. First, the event itself - as Andrew Sutton recently wrote on Facebook 

"UK: SEN CHEWING OVER THE SAME OLD NOURISHMENT-FREE GRISTLE
The Labour Party is holding yet another weary review of 'special educational needs'. Look at its agenda, if you can bear to: http://www.nasen.org.uk/latestnews/?news=109

Not a hint that the system has no idea of what it is doing, employs 'teachers' with no training in pedagogy, and does not even grasp that this results in the fundamental problem of children's not being taught.

Just to reinforce the point, Andrew then added the Comment:

Why are they doing this anyway. The Government surely is about to publish a White Paper. The old agendas are all trampled flat, nobody has anything to say. Haven't people anything better to do to fill their (highly) paid time?

So it's good to find a nugget of something interesting - and not just because I too am a Churchill Fellow - recipient in 2007 of a Winston Churchill Memorial Trust travel fellowship (and yes, you should check it out). Here it is: an inspirational mother and daughter:

One inspirational mother and daughter team are Nadia Clark and her mother, Katie. Nadia has cerebral palsy and is deaf. She uses a vocal synthesiser to speak, but her indefatigable spirit and intelligence shines through and she soon hopes to go to University. She is the recipient of a Winston Churchill Foundation grant to research alternative methods of communication.

Her mother, Katie, is a woman of great determination and she has worked tirelessly to support her daughter. She spent two years looking for a school that would take Nadia, moving her family across the country to do so. She later formed the parent-carer forum, One Voice Communicating Together and believes the future for SEN & disability services should be about “looking at things differently and more creatively”. She stressed, and I thoroughly agree with this, the need for good emotional support for families in the early years, saying supporting parents’ self-esteem is vital if they are to be able to be strong for their children.

Each will find their own inspiration and interest in their story. As one who has just seen his daughter aged 29 years move out of the family home, I can assure anyone that "good emotional support" is essential for parents (... and grandparents ... and siblings) well beyond "the early years".

-----------------------------

You can find Special Needs Jungle's ever interesting updates on SEN on twitter as @SpcialNdsJungle and also on Facebook, though I haven't checked the link.

BTW I don't know how to link to Andrew's specific Status update on Facebook, but if you go searching for it, it was on Monday this week.

 

The 3rd lesson David Cameron learned as a parent of a disabled child: July 2009

As we wait for the Department of Education to publish the SEN White Paper, here is an echo from July 2009, an article in The Independent "David Cameron: the five lessons I learned as a father of a disabled child - and intend to put into practice".

This was his third lesson:

"The third lesson is that we've got to make it easier for parents to get the right education for children with disabilities. So many parents get stuck on a merry-go-round of assessments, appeals and tribunals to get a statement of special needs and the extra help their child needs. There's a structural reason for that. The people that decide who gets specialist education – the local education authorities – are also the ones who pay for it. We're seriously looking at how we can resolve that conflict of interest so that parents don't have to enter into such a huge battle for special education."

A structural conflict of interest is a serious matter. But local authorities being both assessors and funders isn't the whole of that conflict. They are also providers of most SEN school placements and commissioners much of the rest. Free Schools were meant to address this, putting parental choice first. But proposers of Special Free School required Local Authority approval and the SEN Green Paper systematically confused "choice" and "preference", holding out the latter to parents.

There is such a powerful lobby in favour of this "structural conflict of interest" that even a Prime Minister with knowledge of the "huge battle for special education" has been as yet unable to defeat it. This story has still some distance to run.

A Preference for Choice

Let me first ask your opinion.

Imagine. On the table in front of you is a Button. Beside it is a Cheque, made out to you, for the sum of £1,000,000 sterling.

Now your opinion: you have two options and I invite you to select just one of the options.

Option A grants you a preference of the Button or the Cheque.

Option B grants you a choice of the Button or the Cheque.

Would I be correct in assuming that you would select Option B? That, in your opinion a “Choice” is to be preferred to a “Preference”?  Would I also be correct if I presumed your agreement that “Choice” and “Preference” are entirely different, separate notions? Not to the Department of Education (DfE), they are not.

Consider “Free Schools in 2013”, the DfE’s guidance for those proposing to open a Special Free School in 2013: “Things to know before you start”. 

Paragraph 1.1 asserts “… We want parents to have a choice of more good schools …”.  Paragraph 1.2 expands “The Free Schools Programme is helping us realise this vision …. By introducing increased competition, innovation and parental choice, we aim to raise standards across the school system.”

You may be ahead of me, and guessing what is coming next.

Paragraph 1.3 is a little longer: “Special Free Schools are part of the Free Schools programme ….  Parents of children with special educational needs (SEN) will have a choice of which school they want their child to attend.”

Actually, it does not say that.  In italics is what those like you and I who understand the difference between “choice” and “preference” might have expected having read Paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2. What, however, Paragraph 1.3 does say is “Parents of children with special educational needs (SEN) can make representations about which school they want their child to attend.” In other words, parents can express a preference not a choice.  Just in case you have any doubt as to who will really exercise choice, paragraph 1.3 concludes “For children with SEN, the introduction of special Free Schools will help to ensure …. that local authorities have more choice about which special provision is suitable for pupils.”

I invite you to consider how, as far as parental choice is concerned, this differs from the situation now? .

This is no an aberration. This conflation of meaning of the words “choice” and “preference” runs through the SEN Green Paper “Support and Aspiration”. Consider this sentence from the Foreword: “We want to give parents more control by …. ensuring more choice  by allowing parents to name in their child’s plan, a preference for any state-funded school.”   Control, choice, preference. Between the Button and the Cheque, do you want “Choice” or “Preference”?  (Notice the word “Control”. Chapter 2 is headed “Giving Parents Control”). 

Paragraphs 2.44-2.54 are entitled, “A Clear Choice of School”. 

If this is heading where you and I now strongly suspect it is, “Choice” is anything but “Clear”. Sure enough, Paragraph 2.46 begins boldly and, one would otherwise have thought, "clearly" enough: “There should be a real choice for parents …. We believe that real choice for parents requires a diverse and dynamic school system … [with] … the autonomy and flexibility to respond effectively to parental choice; parents to be able to express a preference for a placement in any state-funded school ….”

You do not, I feel sure, need me to point out to you once more, the conflation of the words “choice” and “preference” into one muddled meaning. 

What if the title, clearly and honestly had been  “A Clear Preference of School”. What if the promise were that “There should be a real preference for parents ….”?  What if "choice" were replaced in every instance by "preference". About as enticing as a button instead of a a million pounds.

Who writes this stuff?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joint Committee on Human Rights inquires into independent living for disabled adults

On 11^th February 2011,  the Joint Committee on Human Rights, chaired by Dr Hywel Francis MP, launched an inquiry into the implementation of the right of disabled people to independent living.

Joint Committees consist of MPs and Lords and conduct an ongoing examination of a particular area (such as human rights). The Joint Committee on Human Rights is a permanent committee.

I had not heard of this particular enquiry until today and have not yet satisfactorily tracked down a written record of its proceedings. (If anyone can help, please do so in a Comment below). I am grateful to Carer Watch’s blog for the alert. If you follow the link, you will find you can download or play a video of proceedings this week, on 18^th October (see earlier proceedings below).

Unfortunately, the call for written submissions has long-since closed, on Friday 29^th April 2011.

However, the launch of the inquiry on the Joint Committee website contains a clearly written remit of the inquiry and a useful account of independent living.

There, you will find a description of  “Independent living” by the Office for Disability Issues: "Independent living is about disabled people having the same level of choice, control and freedom in their daily lives as any other person."

[This brought to mind our experience of a recent meeting with social workers, planning for our daughter Sarah’s imminent move into her own accommodation with two friends.  I asserted that she was entitled to “go home” from time to time like any other young person and that her care needed to be managed to enable her to do so. This seemed to cause one of the social workers present some considerable difficulty, because of the impact on her department’s budgets.]

There is also a useful ‘history lesson’ on recent governments’ policy:

Independent living was placed at the heart of the New Labour Government’s policy on disability. Each of the three main political parties expressed their approval of the Independent Living Strategy published in 2008, which sets out actions aimed at improving the choice and control disabled people have over the services they need to live their daily lives. The aims of the strategy are that:

• Disabled people (including older disabled people) who need support to go about their daily lives will have greater choice and control over how support is provided
• Disabled people (including older disabled people) will have greater access to housing, education, employment, leisure and transport opportunities and to participation in family and community life.

In June 2010, the Coalition Government explained that it was looking at further ways of taking the Independent Living Strategy forward.

As I read this, I am reminded, too, of the recent SEN Green Paper, and the commitment in Section 4 “Preparing for Adulthood” to addressing the experience of so many that leaving school for adult services is like ‘leaping off a cliff’ or ‘hurtling into a void’.  “Too often”, the Green Paper rightly asserts, “the opportunities and support available to disabled young people and young people with SEN fall short of what they need to make a successful transition to adult life.”

For this reason, we at Paces called our adult transition programme “Leaping the Void”.  Our Mission Statement, which you can see at the top of this blog is explicit: “Supporting families supporting disabled children into independent adulthood as active citizens, especially those with cerebral palsy and particularly through Conductive Education.”  One of our earliest statements about our adult services asserted that inclusion, truly understood, was about “the politics of citizenship” and that “We need a view of inclusion which is lifelong.”

These early formulations seem, to me, to chime harmoniously with the definition from the Office for Disability issues quoted above: "Independent living is about disabled people having the same level of choice, control and freedom in their daily lives as any other person" – definitions that are inclusive, about what it means to be a member of society and one’s community and are lifelong.

What could this mean for conductive education and young adults? We know of ‘conductive pedagogy’: what do we know of ‘conductive andragogy?'. We know of ‘conductive upbringing': what do we know of 'conductive living'?  As we at Paces look forward, hopefully, to our School becoming a Special Free School from September 2012, so too we are re-assessing our conductive education work with those young adults who may (or could have) attended Paces School as children with Statements of Special Educational Need. As two of our very first 4 pupils in 1997, finally take steps to living independently of their parents, what ought conductive education have to say about their “independent living”?

 

 

On 24^th May 2011, the Joint Committee held its first public evidence session http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news/evidence-session-on-independent-living/

Witnesses

 

    i. National Centre for Independent Living, RADAR, Disability Alliance, and UK Disabled People’s Council

    ii. Independent Living in Scotland, Disability Wales and Disability Action

 

On 28^th June 2011, the Joint Committee held  a further public evidence session

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news/independent-living-evidence-session-on-28-june/

The implementation of the right of disabled people to independent living

Witnesses

    i. Disabled people with experience of independent living issues

    ii. Carers UK, People First, Scope, and Age UK

 

On 18^th October, as linked above, the Committee held its third session.

 

On 25^th October there is a further session of evidence

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news/independent-living-evidence-session-on-25-october/

 

 

Each of these links has a further link to a video recording of the evidence sessions.

 

 

 

Taking the long view, for the moment

Just heard Sarah's going to be home late. Hasn't yet left Paces. Don't know what time she'll be in for tea. Transport company being evasive about where her taxi is and likely time to pick her up. Funny same thing happened last Friday. 

Next week she's joining her two friends - and soon to be housemates - for afternoon tea, to see their new bungalow. All refurbished and newly painted and kitted out by AbbeyCare. Sarah has chosen lilac for her bedroom colour scheme. The great and probably unique thing about AbbeyCare is that it was set up by parents of a child, now young woman, with cerebral palsy, and their speciality is caring for the younger disabled client with complex health needs in their own homes.

It's good to feel there'll be someone to care for Sarah when in future the taxi is late, as well as the team at Paces.

Sometimes it's hard to take the long view. Just now I'm more concerned about the next few weeks and Sarah leaving home for her new home.

What set me off with this little posting was a comment over on Conductive World, Andrew reflecting on the "inevitably long-term perspectives" of parents, as he draws attention to a posting on a Belgian Conductive Education blog, which Andrew kindly translates on his blog.

It's a familiar story - and worry:

This anxiety refers to a question: what can be the sense of a process of guiding one's children on a along a path... that ultimately takes the form of an dead end? What is the sense of a process that ask someone to go forwards... towards a brick wall.
Unfortunately, the answer is a simple one: there is no sense!

The writer calls it "a brick wall"; we've said it's like "jumping off a cliff" or "hurtling into a void" (which is why we called our young adult group "Leaping the Void"). The challenge is continuity, taking the long-term perspective, the long view, helping young people "into independent adulthood as active citizens" as it says in the header to this blog.

The SEN Green Paper is an odd document, I find; rather muddled and internally contradictory. But it does propose one much needed radical change, the recognition - insistence even - on the importance of individual planning from 0 - 25 years. For me, of course, this raises - as it has at Paces since about 2000 - all sorts of questions about how Sarah (and others in Leaping the Void) should be helped to discover for herself what a 'conductive life' might mean and how 'conductive living' might- or should - replace 'conductive upbringing' or 'conductive pedgagogy'.

I wish our Belgian friends every success as they try to work out how, sustainably, to create "a place for ​conductive pedagogy that can accommodate children up to age 18" .... and beyond, no doubt, to independent citizenship apart from their parents.