The Department for Education has been strongly criticised by headteachers’ leaders and special educational needs and disabilities experts for refusing to publish its projections on the financial impact of its planned reforms for children with SEND.
Headteachers’ unions have warned that it is vital the government shares its financial modelling on the impact of its SEND reforms and have said failure to do so will fuel concerns that the department has a “hidden agenda”.
Their comments come after the DfE refused to publish predictions it has made about how the demand for education, health and care plans (EHCPs) will decline as result of the SEND Green Paper and its SEND and alternative provision (AP) improvement plan.
In a Freedom of Information Act request, Tes asked the department for any financial modelling it has carried out on the estimated future cost of EHCPs.
In its response, the DfE said that it does have this information but will not be disclosing it because of an exemption in the FoI that relates to the formation of government policy.
The refusal comes after sector experts had already raised concerns that the DfE’s SEND reforms are being primarily driven by a desire to bring down costs.
The SEND Green Paper last year warned that high-needs spending could not continue to rise at its current rate and that the DfE wanted to divert spending so that more was focused on early intervention.
The DfE published its follow-up SEND and AP plan earlier this year, which included plans to create new national standards for SEND and a new banding system setting expectations of what services should be delivered and how much they should cost.
Tes asked the DfE for any “modelling or predictions about how demand for EHCPs will decline as result of its SEND Green Paper plans and its SEND and AP improvement plan” and “for any financial modelling it has done for the estimated future cost of EHCPs”.
But the department has declined to publish the information requested on the grounds that “releasing this information could impact ministers’ and officials’ ability to have rigorous and candid policy conversations on these reforms”.
It confirmed that it does hold this information but is not releasing it under the FoI Act because of an exemption that relates to the formation of government policy.
Julie McCulloch, director of policy at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “It is vital that the Department for Education publishes its financial modelling on the impact of its SEND reforms.
“Failure to publish this information will fuel concerns that the department has a hidden agenda on SEND funding. This is of particular concern because these funding streams are under such huge pressure and we cannot have a situation in which there is a secret government assessment that its reforms will somehow solve this problem without any opportunity for stakeholders to see its sums.”
James Bowen, assistant general secretary of school leaders’ union the NAHT, said: “NAHT has called for a full financial impact assessment of the SEND review government proposals.
“The need for transparency around their modelling and costs is critical for a number of reasons, but especially to secure some trust and confidence that the government are serious and ambitious in implementing reforms in a system our members tell us is increasingly unable to meet the needs of children and young people with SEND.”
The SEND legal advice charity IPSEA has also voiced concerns.
Its policy manager, Catriona Moore, said it was “clear from the outset that the main purpose of the SEND review was to reduce spending”.
She added: “The premise of the Green Paper was that too many children are receiving too much specialist provision and the intention is to reduce this. But there’s no evidence that children and young people are being given EHCPs unnecessarily - quite the reverse.
“The Department for Education needs to be transparent about what it’s basing the SEND reforms on and what it expects the impact to be - not just on local authorities’ finances but on children and young people with needs of all types.”
Tes reported in July 2021 that the department’s permanent secretary, Susan Acland-Hood, had told MPs that the SEND review was focused on ensuring more parents do not need to get an EHCP in order to get what they need for their child.
Its SEND and Alternative Provision Improvement plan, published this year after the Green Paper and review, includes creating new national standards in SEND and moving to a digitised system for EHCPs, but these reforms look set to take years to come to fruition across the country.
A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Our special educational needs and alternative provision improvement plan sets out how we will make sure all children and young people, and particularly those with an education, health and care plan, receive the support they need.
“We are putting significant investment into the high-needs budget, which will be worth £10.1 billion by 2023-24, a rise of over 50 per cent over four years, and are working to make sure there is earlier intervention, consistent high standards and less bureaucracy where children do need additional support.”
You need a Tes subscription to read this article
Subscribe now to read this article and get other subscriber-only content:
