“We have the most vulnerable children, but less support” Special and alternative provision sector report: The Children’s Commissioner’s School Census

Recently, my office published The Children’s Plan: The Children’s Commissioner’s School Census. For the first time, I used my data powers on schools, conducting a census to better understand how leaders and staff are supporting the children in our school system in ways far beyond teaching. 

For most children in England, education reforms have transformed outcomes. Since the reform movement more than two decades ago – a movement I was at the heart of as a teacher, headteacher and MAT leader – schools in England have been the beneficiaries of huge amounts of energy and attention relative to other public services. They represent a genuine success story of national public policy.

But those reforms haven’t worked for all children – that was the clear message of The Children’s Plan. At times, they have even come at the expense of some children, who still don’t get the education they deserve.

That first report explored the responses from leaders in mainstream schools. Today, I’m publishing analysis of the responses from special schools and alternative provision settings. It’s here, in these settings, that some of the most important work in education can happen. I want to make my appreciation and respect for staff in these settings explicit – they are doing some of the most vital, and most under-valued, roles in English education. They are superheroes, often doing amazing work with little reward. There is so much good happening in these settings, and so much of that good is driven by a dedicated and highly capable workforce.

This is true of special schools, which provide and education for children with learning disabilities, children with complex health needs, hospital schools for children who are unwell, and it is true of alternative provision where children are given a second shot at their education. In my visits to these settings, I have seen staff working tirelessly to turn around children’s interactions with education and provide – in some cases – the first positive experience a child has had with education.

I wanted my office to examine the data from my school census from these settings, because my concern is that children’s voices – especially those with disabilities – are not listened to, or brushed under the carpet. I have seen this throughout my time as Children’s Commissioner; too often it is easy to simply claim that children aren’t impacted by policy change, or to ignore their voices where it is expedient to do so, which I have seen this year in the debate around assisted dying.

I wanted to understand what these settings know, and indeed don’t know, about their pupils. I worry that for these settings, we care too little and expect too much. They are not necessarily the solution to their pupils’ problems, and often it appears that there is a belief that they are going to solve long-standing, systemic, and deep-rooted issues. For all the excellent work that staff do, these settings are not a panacea.

If we are to create an education system that is inclusive by definition and by design, it is not enough to simply cover the basics. Accessibility is not a tick box exercise, it must be something that meaningfully engages with the reality of a disabled child’s experience – an experience which is so often, even when basic legal requirements are met, is much poorer than it is for other children.

For a truly inclusive education system that meets children’s needs, we need a more inclusive society – and that goal, lofty as it may be, begins in mainstream education. That is why, in The Children’s Plan, I called for a more inclusive mainstream education system, and a presumption of mainstream for most pupils. This won’t be every pupil, of course, nor will it be all the time, but we should have a system that encourages all pupils to interact with each other. That’s what children tell me they want: to go to their local school, with their friends, and have their needs met.

At all levels, this more inclusive system must be based on those who work with children having the relevant information about their lives. In special and alternative provision settings, knowing the details of pupils’ lives can make such a difference. It can allow schools to address the wider challenges and barriers that children in these settings may face.

Despite this, as in mainstream, what schools know about their pupils is sadly lacking. Take special schools, where, despite many pupils having an Education, Health and Care Plan that should deliver multi-agency working: just 28% were able to estimate how many of their pupils were absent from school due to treatment for serious or complex illness.  Two-thirds (66%) could only provide an estimate of the number of their pupils on waiting lists for mental health support. 

Or alternative provision settings, where despite the prevalence of poverty in the areas they serve, just over two-thirds (67%) could only provide an estimate of the number of their pupils living in unsuitable accommodation. Fewer than half (47%) were only able to estimate the number of their pupils receiving Free School Meals.

Let me be absolutely and unequivocally clear: this is not the fault of school leaders. It is the consequence of a system that is not set up to give those working with children the full picture of their lives. It is the consequence of fragmented systems working in siloes, even for some of the most vulnerable children. It is the consequence of a hollowing out of children’s services and exacerbated by the fact that special schools and alternative provision settings are, in many ways, fighting an uphill battle – they are more likely to be situated in deprived areas, with all the challenges that can bring.

We must have a system that works for children with complex needs and difficult lives. Many of them will be educated in the schools examined in this report. Many of them, regrettably, will fall out of the system, and find themselves in children’s homes or Young Offender Institutions. One of my greatest worries for our most vulnerable children under our current system is that their lives might be left to chance – a roll of the dice as to where those we deem ‘complex’ will be educated.

The solution to many of these problems is upstream. It is, I believe, the vision for children’s services set out in The Children’s Plan, the report based on my recent census of mainstream schools.

We need a system that gives schools the information that they require to support children more thoroughly, as most say they want to do.

We need a knowledge base of this work for schools to draw on, as so many of them have already done for pedagogy. 

We need a system that respects childhood, treating every child as a whole person – not a diagnosis to be managed.

I was so proud to be part of the school reform movement a decade and a half ago. But it is time to once again embrace a reforming zeal in education. We must equip schools with what they need to deliver for the pupils they serve.