Plans to shake up special educational needs and disabilities funding by giving schools more cash up front - but expecting them to deliver more - risk “penalising” those who take an inclusive approach, headteachers have warned.
Council leaders have also warned that there is little desire among local authorities to pilot the planned funding changes until the government’s wider SEND reforms are more established.
The Department for Education has carried out a consultation on plans to allow local councils to develop a “SEND inclusion funding formula” for schools in their areas.
It would mean local areas getting powers to direct more from the high-needs block directly to core school budgets, but would also see councils raising the threshold of what mainstream schools are routinely expected to spend on pupils with SEND before they could seek a top-up.
These plans were announced in the summer after major SEND reform proposals, which aim to make mainstream schools more inclusive.
In response to the , headteachers and council representatives have raised concerns about the impact and risks it could pose for schools. They have also warned that more money is needed in the system overall.
Inclusive practice must not be ‘penalised’
The NAHT school leaders’ union argues that the government’s plans risk transferring “greater responsibility, accountability and parental expectation onto schools without providing equivalent control over specialist services, health provision, local authority capacity or wider system resources”.
Its submission states: “Highly inclusive schools could be particularly disadvantaged if increased expectations are not fully matched by additional funding and support.
“Any reform must therefore be accompanied by clear evidence that schools will not be worse off financially and that inclusive practice is not inadvertently penalised.”
The DfE plan is that councils and local schools forums would apply to the DfE to be able to provide more upfront funding to schools, but also to raise the notional SEND budget above £6,000.
This is the current amount schools are expected to spend from their existing funding before seeking a top-up or an education, health and care plan to meet the needs of a pupil with SEND.
However, heads and council leaders warn that adjusting funding levels between different pots will not solve the current crisis without more money going into the system overall.
‘Inadequate’ funding envelopes
The NAHT submission says: “Schools, local authorities and support services are all operating within funding envelopes that are already inadequate to discharge their responsibilities effectively.”
It adds: “In reality, schools are not funded with a protected or ringfenced allocation equivalent to the first £6,000 of SEND expenditure for every child that may need it. In practice, school core budgets are already fully committed to staffing, resources, premises and other ongoing core costs.
“Raising the threshold without providing genuinely additional and clearly identifiable funding risks increasing schools’ responsibilities without ensuring they have the capacity or resources to meet them. “
The Association of School and College Leaders raises a similar concern in its submission.
It says that, given current financial pressures, ASCL would be “cautious” about expecting schools to spend substantially more than the existing £6,000 threshold “until there is clear evidence that compensatory funding is sufficient and sustainable”.
Accuracy of the notional SEND budget questioned
ASCL also criticises the “unhelpful” system of expecting schools to have a notional SEND budget: “We think that the profile of demand and distribution of pupils with SEND makes it extremely difficult to improve the accuracy of the notional budget calculation to the point where there is a good fit between the notional budget and underlying need.”
There are also concerns that the DfE’s plans are looking to redistribute funding before its SEND reforms have been fully introduced or bedded in.
Phil Haslett, interim chair of the f40 group of councils, told Vlog that responses from members so far showed “limited appetite to piloting changes to the notional budget without wider changes to both statutory SEND processes and the national funding formula”.
He added: “It would be much better looking at this kind of model when we have a more stable system, and the new reforms are agreed and implemented.”
Mr Haslett said that any adaptation to the structure of funding should be “aligned and implemented alongside changes to the EHCP system and the implementation of individual support plans”.
High-needs funding ‘must increase’
Council organisations have also warned the DfE that more overall funding is needed to deliver improvements for pupils with SEND.
In its consultation response, the Local Government Association says: “The Department’s proposals appear to be based on the assumption that mainstream schools are sufficiently and sustainably funded to meet need, where in reality schools consistently report that existing resources, including notional SEND funding, are insufficient to meet current levels and complexity of need.”
Meanwhile, the Association of Directors of Children’s Services says: “The central issue is not simply how existing funding is distributed, but whether the proposals are supported by sufficient additional investment to increase the overall capacity of the SEND system.
“These proposals are predicated on mainstream schools being sufficiently and sustainably funded to meet need; this is not currently the case.
“If earlier intervention is to become a defining principle of the SEND system, the overall High Needs funding envelope must increase rather than simply be redistributed.”
The government consultation on these funding changes closed last week.
