The struggles faced by learners with SEND and their parents when accessing post-16 education were laid bare to MPs by specialist FE providers.

The Commons Education Select Committee held a special roundtable evidence session as part of its SEND inquiry, at which MPs were told of the funding battles parents and providers went through to ensure young people got the education they were entitled to.

After hearing evidence, the committee’s chair, Robert Halfon, called for greater clarity. He added: “Clearly there need to be much clearer and tougher frameworks for post-16 because it seems to be a big tangle really. Not just about funding, which is crucial, but in every other part of it from plans to those who don’t have the plans to the outcomes.

“It seems to be a big tangled mess: that is the conclusion I’ve reached.”

‘Postcode lottery’

Northampton College principal Pat Brennan-Barrett said she was “deeply concerned” about the “postcode lottery” that exists in post-16 SEND funding, and the “language of the [government’s SEND] code and how it is interpreted”.

Different interpretations of what is meant by progress for a learner with SEND - and also whether an Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) should be issued only up to the age of 19, as opposed to 25 - can lead to funding challenges, she added, with colleges having to use their adult education budget to support these learners. Ms Brennan-Barrett said this alone was costing Northampton College around £300,000 a year.

GCSE English and maths resits

Mr Halfon said he had seen figures showing that around a third of students who had to resit GCSE English and maths had SEND. The representatives from the specialist FE sector confirmed that a “significant amount” of colleges’ disadvantage funding, dedicated funding to support students with moderate learning difficulties and disabilities, was being spent on GCSE resits.

Employment-focused outcomes

David Ellis, chief executive of National Star College, a specialist FE college in Gloucestershire, said there was a “general feeling” that local authorities were moving towards commissioning EHCPs that were more focused on employment outcomes, rather than any other types of positive outcome. “They are beginning to lose sight of the other valuable outcomes - whether it’s independent living, or communication, or control, or even just confidence,” he added.