Changes to SEN funding could be damaging for children

The government has proposed changes to how it allocates funding to councils for children with SEN through the so-called “high-needs” element of the dedicated schools grant (DSG).

This funding covers anyone up to the age of 25 with SEN who may have educational, health and care (EHC) plans, as well as all pupils up to the age of 16 placed in alternative education provision.

The high-needs block is currently funded to councils on the basis of historic spending levels. However, the government has proposed allocating funding using proxy indicators to calculate need, not based on the assessed needs of individuals.

The proxy indicators it intends to use are an indicator of low attainment (measured by the number of pupils not achieving level 2 in reading at the end of key stage 2), two indicators relating to the number of children not in good health on the population census, disability living allowance (DLA) data, and two indicators relating to deprivation.

A report last year by the Department for Education and Isos Partnership stated that the current funding of the high-needs block, through historic spending, is unfair.

It also states that schools and local authorities said that using proxy factors would not be entirely accurate, and that it would not reflect differences in the number of pupils in a school with SEN, or how inclusive a school is.

It recommended schools agreeing on a “core entitlement” that they will all provide to children with SEN to prevent unfair allocations of funding. However, the DfE’s consultation on high needs funding has not proposed this, stating that it is unconvinced this would cover the variety in schools’ SEN provision.

Tim Nicholls, policy manager at the National Autistic Society, said he is concerned some children could see a reduction in support as a result of the proposed changes.
 
“We welcome the government’s efforts to address the serious underfunding of education support in certain areas of the country," he said.

"But we’re concerned that these proposals could actually reduce support for children and young people and damage their long-term prospects by taking funding away in other areas perceived to be ‘over-funded’.
 
“The National Autistic Society and families will be using this consultation to make sure the government provides enough funding to support all children on the autism spectrum to reach their full potential. We urge the government to listen to this the feedback.”

Peter Harwood, senior lecturer in Education and Inclusion Studies at the University of Wolverhampton, said the consultation is unclear on how degrees of need – such as the cost of therapy or social support – will be calculated with the new formula, and might result in more tribunals between families and councils.

“The implication is that there will be some kind of weighted tariff, but I struggle to see how this would work in practice and it would suggest an increased need for external arbitration," he said.

“I think there needs to be a retention of local flexibility so that local authorities can support provision that is preventative in nature and addresses need early on.

“This by definition is often the most 'risky' and difficult to justify, but particularly in relation to the intervention for children and young people with anxiety disorders, the failure to allow for this type of funding will only result in excessive subsequent cost.”