Making EHC plans
more effective for CYP with
sensory impairments
Lilias Reary, Andrea Scrivens
25 February (London) and 8 March (York) 2016
Outline for the Day
10.00-10.10:
10.10-10.50:
Welcome and introduction
The Analysis of 40 EHC plans
Short Break
11.00-12.00:
Sections A and B of the EHC plan
Lunch
12.45-13.50:
Health and Social Care input
Short Break
14.00-15.00:
Section E - Outcomes
Break
15.10 -15.45: Section F – Provision
15.45-16.00: Plenary and Questions
Learning Aims for the Day
• Know the required sections of an EHC plan
and any flexibilities permitted
• Know the ‘information to include’ for each
section in an EHC plan
• Know how to improve those sections involving
Health and Social Care
• Feel more confident about producing and
ensuring more effective EHC plans for children
and young people with sensory impairments
in order to improve their outcomes
Session One
The Analysis of 40 EHC plans
Why?
• To identify emerging trends (both positive and
not so positive) from EHC plans for CYP with SI
from across England
• To use this information to support NatSIP in its
objective to support professionals in writing
ever more effective EHC plans by:
- identifying training needs;
- providing additional resources and tools
- producing practical guidance
Information on the EHC plan review
The Sample
• 40 EHC plans for CYP with SI from at least 32
different LAs across England
• The CYP ranged in age from early years to 17
years
Method
• A tick sheet based on the information to be
included in an EHC plan (SEND COP sect 9.62 )
was used for quantitative information.
• Individual sections of each plan were then read to
assess the qualitative information
Task – ‘Room for improvement’
From your experience of EHC
plans:
Which aspects of the plans do you
think might have shown ‘room for
improvement’?
What did we find?
The positives
Most LAs had made a conscious effort to:
• Make the plan look more attractive and
accessible
• Access the views aspirations of children,
young people and their parents / carers
• Reduce the use of jargon in the plan itself
• Describe the SEN and identify outcomes
There were aspects in some plans that are
worthy of sharing as ‘good practice.’
What did we find?
•
•
•
•
•
•
‘Room for Improvement’ Headlines
The easy part – format of the plan - was not easy!
The Health and Social Care sections seemed to
cause the most difficulty
Out of the 40 EHC plans, there were no examples
of a personal budget being used in Education.
SMART outcomes not easy to formulate
Rigorous assessment not always reflected in the
description of the CYP’s SEN
Provision confused with classroom management
strategies and outcomes
What did we find?
Format of a plan
SEND COP para 9.62 states:
The format of a plan will be agreed locally……..
However, as a statutory minimum (they) must
include the following sections, which must be
separately labelled…. using the letters A-K…’
The permitted ‘flexibilities’
SEN COP, para 9.62 continues:
….The sections do not have to be in the order
below (alphabetical) and LAs may use an action
plan in tabular format to include different
sections….as long as sections are separately
labelled.’
Format of the plan – the findings
Almost 40% did not fully meet the required
(‘statutory minimum’) specifications, due to:
• Missing out complete sections
• Using the letters required by COP, but ‘content to
be included’ did not match up
• Using own unique format, but still using the title
– EHC plan
• Putting several sections together, but not
labelling the different elements
• Using old terminology (Parts 1-5) and calling it an
EHC plan
Format of the plan – comment
The above findings were totally unexpected, but
easily corrected…………….
Our suggestions
1. Do not delete any sections
2. Do a quick simple check using the ‘The first
quick check’ followed by the ‘Statutory
Minimum Checklist.’
‘The first quick check’
1. Are there 12 clearly defined sections?
Y/N
2. Are the letters A –K used (including H1
and H2) to denote each section?
(Note – do not need to be in alphabetical order)
Y/N
3. Are some sections joined together and /
or in tabular format?
Y/N
If yes, are the different sections within the
section clearly labelled?
Y/N
4. Does the letter of the section heading
match the content title in para 9.62?
Y/N
(See ‘Statutory Minimum Checklist’ below)
Task (Content of EHC plan)
1. Use the 2 checklists to evaluate
your LA EHC plan (or the EHC
plan provided) to ensure all the
required sections are present.
2. Note any changes that need to
be made to your LA’s EHC plan or,
if you do not have a plan with you,
make a note to check your plans
when you get back
‘Statutory Minimum’ Checklist
A
B
Views, interests and aspirations of the child
and their parents, or of the young person
CYP’s special educational needs
C
CYP’s health needs related to their SEN
D
CYP’s social care needs related to their SEN
or to a disability
Outcomes sought for the CYP
E
F
Special educational provision required by
CYP
‘Statutory Minimum’ Checklist cont’d
G
I
Any health provision required by the learning
difficulties or disabilities which result in CYP
having SEN
Social care provision to be made for CYP under
18, as a result of CSDPA (1970)
Any other social care provision resulting from
learning difficulties or disabilities
Placement
J
Personal Budget
K
List of advice and information and appendices
H1
H2
How the sections of an EHC plan are related
H1 and H2
Social Care
Provision
J. Personal budget
D.
Social Care
Needs
F. SEN
Provision
G. Health
Provision
(Where the SEN
provision will be made)
C. Health
Needs
E. Outcomes
B. SEN
I. Placement
A. Aspirations
Underpinned by rigorous and detailed assessment
Think about the ‘Golden Thread’
throughout (From DfE)
There should be a golden thread directly from the aspirations
to the provision - this is achieved by thinking about outcomes
as steps on the journey towards the aspirations.
Aspirations
Needs
Outcomes
Provision
A good Education Health and Care
(EHC) plan… • Meets the requirements of the Act,
regs and the Code.
• Describes positively what children
and YP can do
• Clear, concise, understandable and
accessible
• Is co-produced
• Sets good, relevant outcomes
• Tells the child or young person’s
story well/ coherently
(From DfE)
Session Two
Closer
examination of
Section A and
Section B
Section A. Views, interests and aspirations
of the CYP and his/ her Parents or the YP
‘Information to include’ (SEND COP, para 9.69)
• Details about the child (and his /her parents)
or young person’s aspirations and goals for the
future
• Details about play, health, schooling,
independence, friendships, further education
and future plans (inc. employment if practical)
• Summary of how to communicate with CYP
Section A. ‘Information to include’ cont’d
• The CYP’s history
• If written in the first person, plan should make
it clear if the child is being quoted directly or if
the views of parents / professionals are being
represented.
Section A. General Findings
(Largely administrative)
• Section A had more subsections (‘information
to include’) missing than any other section
• Very variable in length from one side of A4 to
6 pages
• Very difficult to access the information as only
a few plans had clearly marked subsections
Section A. Specific Findings
(Areas to check in your plans)
• Missing out the child’s views etc. due to their young
age or capacity to express them
• Confusing aspirations with provision – ‘I want my
child to go to a specific visual unit’
• Failing to include:
- the CYP’s preferred method of communication
- the CYP’s history and details about schooling, etc
- when written in first person, whether views coming
directly from CYP or an adult’s interpretation
Suggestions for improving Section A
• Write to the required content and use sub
headings
• Use bullet points so that information is
presented in a succinct way
• Use a single page summary to introduce the
child / YP was used by several LAs and
seemed a good way to introduce a child at the
beginning of Section A (not required by SEN COP)
• Include a short section on strengths and
challenges (not required by SEND COP)
Hello! My name is Kirsty
Suggestions for improving Section A cont’d
• Improve the quality of the parental input by:
asking parents not just to focus on wants
but also on aspirations
 asking them to think about these
aspirations in the short, medium and long term
 requiring the different professionals to ask
these questions in order to get more detail
(Reference NatSIP document ‘Better Assessment..’)
Suggestions for improving Section A cont’d
• Improve further the quality of the CYP voice /
input by considering:
- the efficacy of the identification of these
views through the use and reporting of
questionnaires
• Increase the number of children having their
views recorded by:
- ensuring there are no assumptions being
made about children being too young
- using a range of techniques to elicit views
Task (Section A)
• Look at the EHC plan from
your LA and check if all the
‘information to be included’
in this section is present
and note any omissions
• Check the quality of the
information and note any
actions to be taken
Section B – The CYP’s special educational
needs. ‘Information to include…’
• All of the child or young person’s identified needs must
be specified.
• SEN may include needs for health and social care
provision that are treated as special educational
provision because they educate or train a young
person (SEN COP, para 9.73)
(Note paras 9.74 – 9.76. Decisions about where to include
health and social care needs / provision:
• must be made on an individual basis
• should be agreed between LA and health and social care
partners)
Section B. The findings
• 39 of the 40 plans (98%) appeared to identify a
range of special needs but there was:
- large variation in length of this section
from half a page (or less!) to multiple pages
- large variation in the amount of detail from
use of very general phrases (‘issues with
anger management,’ ‘sensory processing
developmental difficulties’) to very detailed
information citing assessments
Section B. The findings cont’d
• Only 10 plans (25%) made explicit reference to
health and social care needs; however, the
need for therapy (particularly speech and
language) input seemed to be implicit in many
more plans
• Only 50% plans were consistent in quoting
specific assessment results (although this is
not asked for by the SEN COP) which then
provided a clear baseline for future
monitoring
Suggestions for improving Section B
• This is a crucial section as it should provide
the information on which the rest of the plan
is based
• The information should be based on strong
evidence / assessment and describe all the
SEN needs in sufficient detail to ensure:
- the formation of clear outcomes
- the identification of required provision
- effective monitoring and review
• Need to drill down from the general need
The importance of
assessment
‘A focus on the quality of
assessment will improve
the quality of outcomes’.
Ofsted 2010: A statement is
not enough
Remember this? Have you used it?
Task (Section B)
• Read Section B of the ‘Bad’
plan and identify ways in
which it can be improved.
• How does Section B of your
LA EHC plan measure up?
Session Three
Health
and
Social Care
(Closer examination of
• Sections C and G
• Sections D, H1 &
H2)
Section C. The child or young person’s
health needs which relate to their SEN
Information to include:
• The plan must specify any health needs
related to the child’s SEN
• The Clinical Commissioning Group may also
choose to specify other health care needs
which are not related to the CYP’s SEN
Section C. The Findings
• Just under half the plans (48%) specified any
health needs related to SEN
• Often these ‘needs’ were recorded as
provision (e.g. needs regular vision tests)
• Input did not always give the impression it had
been contributed directly by health
professionals (e.g. ‘known information’)
• Only 12 plans (30%) included health needs not
related to SEN, but often only the condition
given (e.g. diabetes)
Section C. Suggestions for improvement
• Check how health professionals are currently involved
in the EHC plan assessment process in your LA
• If you find that provision (as opposed to needs) is
being recorded in this section, it is helpful to ask:
- why is this provision necessary and what
effect might this have on the child or young
person’s education?
The answer should indicate the needs
• A similar exercise can be used if just a condition is
given – what are the implications of this for the CYP in
the educational setting?
Section G. Health provision required by the
learning difficulties / disability which result in
the CYP having SEN
The Findings
• Only 15 plans (37%) had completed this section
• Only 2 of these 15 plans met the requirements of
being detailed, specific and quantified (but it is a
‘should’ rather than ‘must’)
• Content was very general with phrases such as
‘therapy as normally commissioned’ and ‘as deemed
by the health authority’ often used.
• No plan related the provision to outcomes as requ’d
Section G (Health provision). The Findings
cont’d
• Only 7 plans exercised the option to include
specialist support and therapies, e.g. medical
treatments, OT, physio, specialist equipment
(wheelchairs, continence pads etc.)
• 6 of the above plans included speech and
language therapy and this seems questionable
• Only 4 plans chose to specify health care not
related to the learning difficulties/disabilities
Section G. Suggestions for improvement
• This is the section in which to record provision,
but it should be specific, detailed, quantified and
related to an outcome/s.
• Should never state ‘as described in Section C’!
• Could consider putting it into a table to show the
outcome that is being supported
Provision
As Julie’s hearing levels are unstable, the audiology service
will carry out a review (to include hearing tests, tests of
middle ear function and hearing aid function using real ear
measurement) every 3 months
Outcome
Outcome A.
Section G. Suggestions for improvement cont’d.
• Be aware of the relevant legislation around
considering and agreeing health provision:
- Joint commissioning arrangements must
include arrangements for securing EHC needs
assessment; securing EHC provision and
agreeing personal budgets (Section 26 Children &
Families Act 2014)
- The EHC plan to include any ‘health care provision
reasonably required by the learning difficulties or
disabilities’ (Section 37 Children and Families Act 2014)
Section G. Suggestions for improvement cont’d
- Reg 12 of the SEND Regulations 2014 states that
when preparing an EHC plan, a local authority must:
set out ‘any health provision reasonably required…..’
while
‘the health care provision specified in the plan must
be agreed by the responsible commissioning body.’
• The SEND COP 2014 (paras 9.70, 9.71,9.141):
- each CCG will determine the services it will commission
to meet the reasonable health needs of CYP with SEND
- relevant local clinicians will participate in the CYP’s plan
Section G (Health). SEND COP cont’d
- CCG must ensure oversight to provide assurance
that the needs of children with SEN are being met
- health care provision specified in Section G of EHC
plan must be agreed by the CCG
- any health provision should be included in the draft
EHC plan sent to child’s parents or young person
- partners must have clear disagreement resolution
procedures
- CCG must ensure any specified health provision in
EHC plan is delivered to CYP.
Task (Sections C and G)
• Check sections C and G
in the EHC plan from your
LA or in the ‘bad’ plan
• Identify any improvements
required
Health and Social care
Social Care
Section D. The child or young person’s
social care needs which relate to their SEN
Information to include:
• The EHC plan must specify any social care
needs which relate to the child or young
person’s SEN or which require provision for a
CYP under 18 under section 2 of the CSDPA
1970
• The LA may also choose to specify other needs
not linked to the SEN or disability (Must have
consent of parents)
Section D. The Findings
• This section was sometimes removed completely
from the plan; left blank or a response was given
such as ‘not known to social care’ or ‘no details
available’/ ‘no details given’
• Only 5 (12.5%) plans had completed this section
• An additional 4 plans indicated that the CYP had
been referred for / or was undergoing an
assessment
• One family had been asked to contact social care
for advice
Section D. The Findings cont’d
• 5 plans seemed to confuse fairly basic social
skills needs (met by the school) with needs
requiring social care intervention
• No plans included other social care needs not
linked to SEND, e.g. from child in need
assessment, early help assessment or child
protection plan.
Section D. Suggestions for
improvement
• Find out how your LA currently gets information
from social care for EHC plan assessments
• Consider the CYP’s potential social care needs in
relation to:
- developing independence
- participating fully in family life and activities
in the community
- developing socially and emotionally
Sections H1 and H2. Social care
provision
Why 2 sections?
• H1 is for any social care provision which must be
made for a child / young person under 18
resulting from section 2 of the Chronically Sick
and Disabled Persons Act (CSDPA) 1970
• H2 is for provision not covered by the CSDPA for
under eighteen year olds and….
for those who are 18 and over provided for
under the Care Act 2014
Section H1. Social care provision
Information to include:
• Provision should be detailed, specific and
normally quantified (type of support and
provider), noting if a social care direct
payment
• Should be clear how the provision will help
achieve the outcome
• Must specify all services assessed as needed
under S2 of the CSDPA
Section H2. Social care provision.
Information to include:
• Social care provision identified through early help
and children in need assessments and
safeguarding assessments (must only include
services not provided under section 2 of the
CSDPA). Can include parent carers assessments.
• Any adult social care provision required by those
over 18 and set out in an adult care and support
plan (Not applicable to any plan in the Review)
• May include provision not linked to CYP’s SEND
Sections H1 & H2. The Findings
• Most plans left these sections blank/deleted them.
• At least 3 CYP seemed to have need of social care
provision (2 MSI and 1 registered blind) but none
was specified in either H1 or H2.
• One child had short breaks specified under needs
(Section D) but not specified in provision sections.
• Only 3 plans (out of 5) attempted to complete
section H1 with information about provision but it
given in very broad terms, e.g. ‘long term support
from CDT;’ ‘short term breaks’ and ‘as agreed by
the social care team.’
Sections H1 & H2. The Findings cont’d
• No plan linked the provision to outcomes
• Due to lack of detail, it was impossible to tell if all
the services being provided were specified.
• One plan stated ‘open case but no details given’
(this was written in both H1 and H2)
• Only one plan completed H2 by correctly recording
residential short breaks
• 5 plans stated assessment underway or being
requested – acceptable practice?
• No plan included provision unrelated to CYP’s SEND
Sections H1 & H2. Suggestions for
improvement.
• Know how social care professionals are involved
in the EHC plan assessment process in your LA
• Be aware of the range of services provided under
CSDPA which the LA has a duty to provide if an
assessment shows eligibility criteria are met.
These services include:
practical assistance in the home; adaptations in the
home (alerting devices); assistance to attend
recreational activities outside the home; telephone
(including specialist equipment to use it) etc.
Sections H1 & H2. Suggestions for
improvement cont’d
• Consider presenting the information to be
included in tabular format:
Provision
Outcome/s
Provider
supported
Long term loan of the Enables Jan Children’s
following assistive
to be more
Social
technology – TV loop independent. Care
and flashing doorbell (Outcome 2)
Training for their use.
OT
Sections H1 & H2. Suggestions for
improvement cont’d
• Be aware of the relevant legislation around social
care and the EHC plan needs assessment:
- SEND Regs 2014, sec 4(2) states that the LA,
must notify ‘officers of the LA responsible for
exercising the social care functions for children
with SEND’ when considering an EHC assessment
- SEND Regs 2014, sec 6(1)(e) states the LA must
seek advice and information in relation to social
care regarding any needs or provision for the CYP
Sections H1 & H2. Suggestions for
improvement cont’d
- SEND Regs. Sec 8 ‘Duty to co-operate.’ Social care
must comply with the request from the LA within 6
weeks
• The SEND COP (paras. 9.46, 9.47,9.49,9.52,9.176)
- LA must gather advice from relevant professionals
about the CYP’s education, health and care needs,
desired outcomes and any appropriate provision
- LA should consider with the child’s parent or YP and
those listed in para 9.49, the range of advice required
Sections H1 & H2. Suggestions for
improvement cont’d
- In some cases, a CYP may already have a
statutory child in need or child protection plan,
or an adult social care plan and so the local
authority can include the social care provision
resulting from these assessments in the CYP’s
EHC plan
- Reviews: ‘……and a local authority social care
representative must be invited.’ (SEND COP 9.76)
Task (Section D, H1, and H2)
Look at sections D, H1 and H2
in your EHC plans?
Are there improvements you
could make?
or
Evaluate and improve on
those sections in the ‘bad’
EHC plan
Session Four
All about
Outcomes
and a bit more!!
(A closer examination
of Section E)
Section E. The outcomes sought for
the child or young person
Information to include:
• A range of outcomes over varying timescales
covering education, health* and social care*
• SMART outcomes with a clear distinction
between outcomes and provision
• Steps towards achieving outcomes
• Arrangements for monitoring progress,
including review and transition arrangements
Section E. The outcomes sought for
the child or young person
Information to include cont’d
• Arrangements for setting and monitoring shorter
term targets by the early years provider, school,
college or other education or training provider
• Forward plans for key changes in CYP’s life
• For CYP preparing for transition to adulthood,
outcomes that will prepare them well for
adulthood and clearly linked to the achievement of
aspirations in Sec A.
Section E. The outcomes sought for the
child or young person. The Findings
• Most plans came up with a range of outcomes
(though some used different terminology such as
goals)
• 22 plans (55%) had varying timescales
• Not one plan had consistent SMART outcomes 13 plans did not provide any timescales while
others lacked specificity and / measurability
• Most plans (78%) seemed to omit steps towards
achieving outcomes
Section E. The outcomes sought for the
child or young person. The Findings cont’d
• Arrangements for monitoring progress etc. were
only recorded in this section in 10 plans (25%).
Most frequently found in a separate section
towards the end of the plan.
• Arrangements for setting shorter term targets in
the educational setting were overlooked by most
(present in only 22%)
• Forward plans for key changes were signposted in
7 plans – generally few details given.
Section E. (Outcomes). Suggestions for
improvement
• The ‘quick wins’- ensure that the following are
recorded in Section E:
- arrangements for monitoring progress, reviews
- forward plans for key changes in a CYP’s life
• Outcomes are important…..
‘Outcomes underpin and inform the detail of EHC
plans. (SEND COP, para 9.68)
• The word ‘outcomes’ appears 249 times in the SEND
COP (2015)!!
……and can / should be improved in many cases!!
Section E. (Outcomes). Suggestions for
improvement - focus on outcomes
• Need SMART outcomes – many were very general,
more like aspirations. The two are different, but
there is a relationship between the two of them.
• Aspiration: something which it is hoped will happen
further into the future (longer term)e.g. employment
or further study plans, or the degree of independence
hoped for in adulthood…’ Recorded in Section A
• Outcome: something which contributes towards the
aspiration but can be measured and is expected to
be achieved within the medium term, e.g. by the end
of the key stage. Recorded in Section E.
Section E. Suggestions for improvement cont’d.
Focus on outcomes.
• Writing ‘good’ outcomes:
Know what is important to the CYP and what they want to
achieve (Section A - Aspirations)
+
Know what parents and others think is important for CYP
and what is in their best interests (Section A. Aspirations)
+
The results of assessments and professional information
(indicating gaps/potential barriers). (Sections B,C,D. Needs)
=
OUTCOME
Writing a ‘good’ outcome- example
• Becky in Y1 is ‘a bit sad’ (her words) as she wants
to have friends and be able to play with them.
+
• Becky’s parents want her to be happy and have
friends and learn at school
+
• School staff note she is withdrawn and alone at
breaks. SALT reports indicate expressive and
receptive language at 5th and 10th percentile.
Section E. (Outcomes). Suggestions for
improvement cont’d. Focus on outcomes.
A SMART outcome might be along the lines:
By the end of Year 3, Becky’s speech language
and communication skills will be at, or close to,
the levels expected for a child of her age and
ability so that she will be able to chat with
other children and join in games with them.
Section E. Suggestions for improvement cont’d.
Focus on outcomes
Checking for a ‘good’ outcome
• Is it helping the CYP to achieve / move towards
achieving an identified aspiration?
• Is it person centred (i.e. not service centred)?
• Is it challenging with high expectations?
• Is it SMART?
• Is it clear what benefit the difference or benefit
will be for the pupil?
Section E. Suggestions for improvement cont’d.
Focus on outcomes
The acid test for outcomes:
How easily will you be able to tell if the outcome
has been achieved?
A possible outcome format:
By (give a timescale, end of phase/stage/year),
s/he will be (state achievement) so that he/she
can (state what she / he will be able to do).
Section E. Suggestions for Improvement cont’d.
Focus on outcomes
Beware the ‘woolly’ outcome!!
• She will be more independent X
• He will develop fine motor
skills X
• She will improve her literacy and
numeracy skills X
Task (Section E)
Outcomes.
1. Look at the examples in the first
list on the sheet and identify the
‘good’ outcomes
2. Add information to the second
list of outcomes to make them
SMART
3. How do the outcomes on your EHC plan
measure up?
Section E. Suggestions for Improvement cont’d.
Also include in Section E:
1. Steps towards meeting the outcomes
- these will be shorter term and possibly for
around a year (e.g. By the end of Y2, Becky
will be able to say clearly 60% of the speech
sounds for her age group; her vocabulary will
have increased by a year; she will use simple
sentences)
Section E. Suggestions for Improvement cont’d.
Also include in Section E:
2. The arrangements for monitoring progress,
including review and transition review
arrangements and the arrangements for
setting and monitoring shorter term targets
by the early years provider, school, college or
other education or training provider.
Session Five
A closer look
at Section F
(Special educational
provision)
Section F. The special educational
provision required by the CYP.
Information to include:
• Provision must be detailed and specific and
normally quantified
• Provision must be specified for every need in
Section B
• Should be clear how provision supports
achievement of outcomes
• Health and social care provision must be in
this section if it educates or trains
Section F. The special educational provision
required by the CYP cont’d.
Information to include cont’d
• The plan should specify
 any appropriate facilities, equipment, staffing and
curriculum
any modifications to the National Curriculum
any exclusions from the NC or course in post 16
setting and the proposed substitute
where residential accommodation is appropriate
if there is a Personal Budget, the outcomes to
which it is contributing.
Section F. The special educational provision
required by the CYP. The Findings
• Surprised to find that over 80% of the plans still
describing some, or all of the provision in woolly
terms – ‘would benefit from…;’ ‘access to a teacher
of VI;’ ‘speech and language as required/ as
provided by health;’ ‘MSI provision to be specified
by service.’
• Some plans included lists of classroom strategies
(‘make sure you do not cover your face when
speaking.’)
Section F. The special educational provision
required by the CYP. The Findings
• Most plans (70%) made some attempt to
show how the provision was supporting the
achievement of particular outcomes
• 19 (48%) plans specified some health
provision in this section (usually speech and
language therapy)
• No plans listed social care provision
• No plans allocated personal budgets for
educational provision.
Section F. The special educational provision.
Suggestions for improvement
• Make sure that the provision is detailed,
specific and quantified:
How long is a session? How often is it to be
delivered? Which professional / qualifications
required to deliver the session?
Example. One Braille lesson (1 hour) per week from
a qualified teacher of the Visually Impaired
• Check that only provision and not classroom
management strategies are included.
Section F. The special educational provision.
Suggestions for improvement cont’d
• Linking provision to outcomes seemed to be most
effective when in tabular format. We found the
following helpful:
A
By the end of Y9, R’s speech, language and communication skills
will be at a level expected for a pupil of his age and ability
Section E
Section F
Steps towards meeting Special educational
outcome
provision
Who will be
responsible?
A1 R’s spoken language
Weekly 1:1 session (45
and voc. will show
mins)
SALT
measurable year-year Daily prog of 20 mins
CSW (level
progress (’expected level’)
3BSL)
Section F. The special educational provision.
Suggestions for improvement cont’d
• Although not required by the SEND COP, it can be
helpful to summarise the educational provision
required – again a table can be useful:
Outcome Educational provision being funded
Step
A1, A2,C3
B1, B2
Qualified MSI teacher- weekly sessions of 2 hours
Specialist Speech and Language Therapist – one
session (45minutes) every two weeks, plus 1 x
2hour session every term for liaison with CT/CSW
A3
Radio aid
Remember this?
Starting Assumption in 2014
An Education, Health and
Care Plan should be as good
as, if not better than, a
statement.
Making EHC plans more effective
l
Plenary
Questions
Reflections