Category Archives: local government

Think Tank weighs in on SEND

Posted on by
Reply

Policy Exchange, the Think Tank that describes itself as ‘the UK’s leading think tank’, and ‘an independent, non-partisan educational charity whose mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas that will deliver better public services, a stronger society and a more dynamic economy.’ Has published a new report on SEND, with a foreword by a former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The report contains a great deal of interesting evidence, much of which will already be know to anyone that has been involved with the emerging crisis in SEND that was already apparent from well before the covid crisis hit in 2020. Policy Exchange – Out of Control

A telling paragraph in the report lays bare the need for action

The SEND system established by the Children and Families Act 2014 and the 2015 SEND Code of Practice is inefficient, ineffective and has failed to deliver improved outcomes for children with SEND. Fundamental flaws have created perverse incentives for actors in the system. The current SEND regime was designed to support a much smaller number of acute cases. It has failed to adapt to changing social definitions of SEND that have widened demand. Instead, the concentration of resources and bespoke support at the top end of the spectrum has prompted an escalation of needs which has overwhelmed the system and undermined its long term sustainability. (Page 66).

The paragraph leaves one wondering why the Conservative government that was responsible for the 2014 Act didn’t take action to deal with the problem when in office?

In December 2018, I wrote a blog SEND on the agenda again | John Howson drawing attention to a report from the Local Government Association. There was already concern in local government circles about what was happening in SEND. It is worth repeating the key points from the LGA report.

Addressing the points raised in paragraph 17 of the Report would go a long way to creating a sustainable and successful system for young people with SEND.

  1. To create a more sustainable funding settlement going forward there may be merit in considering some key questions around how incentives in the system might be better aligned to support inclusion, meet needs within the local community of schools, and corral partners to use the high needs block to support all young people with SEND as a collective endeavour. These might include
  2. setting much clearer national expectations for mainstream schools;
  3. rethinking how high stakes accountability measures reflect the achievements of schools which make good progress with children and young people with SEND or at risk of exclusion;
  4. correcting the perverse funding incentives that mean that it can be cheaper to pass the cost of an EHCP or a permanent exclusion onto the high needs block than making good quality preventative support available in-school;
  5. looking again at the focus and content of EHCPs to afford greater flexibility to schools in how they arrange and deliver the support needed;
  6. providing ring-fenced investment from government designed explicitly to support new and evidence-based approaches to early intervention and prevention at scale;
  7. providing additional capital investment and flexibility about how that can be deployed by local government;
  8. issuing a national call for evidence in what works for educating children and young people with these needs, backed up by sufficient funding to then take successful approaches to scale and a new focus for teacher training and ongoing professional development;
  9. more specific advice for Tribunals, parents and local authorities on how the test on efficient use of resources can be applied fairly when comparing state and non-state special school placements; and
  10. reaffirming the principle around the equitable sharing of costs between health and education where these are driven by the health needs of the child or young person.   

https://www.local.gov.uk/have-we-reached-tipping-point-trends-spending-children-and-young-people-send-england

Failures by the conservative government up to 2024 to provide enough educational psychologists to meet the growing demand, and to not index-link the basic grant to schools helped produced a system where the explosion in demand broke the system.

While any report with an analysis of the problem and suggestions for how to tackle it, ahead of the present government’s White Paper, is welcome, we should not have reached the current position.  

One final point, the report seems light on the issue of training for all staff from TAs to teachers to school leaders. The lack of an appreciation of the needs of those that work in schools has been another feature of the long period of Conservative government.

I look forward to see what the Labour government’s White Paper will suggest when it appears.

Few successful appeals for infant class places in 2025.

Posted on by
Reply

One consequence in the fall in the birth rate seems to have been a downward trend in appeals over admissions to infant classes.  Key Stage 1 classes have been capped at 30 pupils for nearly 30 years now, so it might be expected that parents would be keen to ensure their offspring gained a place at the primary school of their choice. After all, parental choice has been a cornerstone of admissions policy since 1979, regardless of the government in power. The data for 2025 admissions ahs now been added to the tie series by the DfE. Admission appeals in England, Reporting year 2025 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

2025
Primary (infant classes)Other primary classesPrimary
Admissions617,802137,153754,955
Admission appeals lodged by parents8,2506,33414,584
Admission appeals lodged by parents (percentage)1.34.61.9
Appeals heard by an appeals panel5,1283,8718,999
Appeals heard by an appeals panel (percentage)0.82.81.2
Successful appeals4991,0961,595
Successful appeals (percentage)9.728.317.7

Of the 617,802 requests for places in infant classes, only 8,250 resulted in an appeal, presumably as the child was not placed in the school of the parent’s choosing at offer day. Some parents either accept another school or a place became available, so 3,122 of these appeals were not proceeded with, leaving just 5,128 appeals heard across the whole of England. Of these appeals, only 499, or 9.7% of the appeals heard were successful, presumably because of the class size limit.

Across the rest of the primary age range, there were only 14,584 appeals, or 1.9% of those either moving children during the Key Stage 2 phase or joining for the first time, perhaps because of the imposition of VAT on private school fees in January 2025. Again, a number of these appeals were not heard, presumably again because a place could be found after the appeal had been lodged. Interestingly, the success rate was much higher for these appeals than for the appeals for admission to infant classes, presumably because there is no mandated maximum class size for Key Stage 2 classes.

In the secondary sector, appeals in 2025 were 4.9% of admissions, around the middle of the 4.5 to 5.5 range of the period between 2016 and 2025. Interestingly, the success rate of these appeals has been falling. In 2025, it was only 19.9%, compared with 26.3% of appeals heard in 2016.

As entry numbers are likely to fall in Year 7 over the next few years, it will be interesting to see whether the percentage of successful appeals rises over the next few years. However, it may well be that popular schools remain attractive to parents, and will still have no spare places creating the need to appeal, especially if siblings are not all granted the place at the same school.

The present Bill before parliament should return in-year admissions for all schools to local authority control. At present academies can opt out of a local system and manage their own in-year admissions. As I have not before (Jacob’s Law) this was especially challenging for children in care needing to find a new school place. Hopefully, their needs will be better appreciated in the future.

Does where you study make a difference to ‘A’ Level outcomes?

Posted on by
Reply

Next week, pupils will receive their GCSE results and will then have to decide where to continue their studies. If they are intending to take ‘A’ levels, then the options may be between staying on at the same school or transferring either to another school or to an institution run under further education rules such as either a general further education college or a Sixth Form College, where they exist.

As the tables for this years’ results by type of institution shows, there are different percentage in terms of outcomes.

Centre typeYearPercentage of results at grade A and abovePercentage of results at grade C and above
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)202548.40%89.70%
Secondary selective school202543.70%88.20%
Free schools202531.30%80.60%
All state-funded202525.20%76.30%
Sixth form college202524.00%76.20%
Academies202523.10%75.00%
Secondary comprehensive or middle school202522.60%75.20%
Other202516.40%55.80%
Secondary modern school/high school202516.30%64.80%
Further education establishment202514.40%66.30%

Young people across England celebrate exam results – GOV.UK

I don’t think anyone would be surprised to see independent schools with the highest percentage of results at A*-A. But it is important to understand what the policy about entering candidates for the examination is when considering outcomes. Is anyone taking the subject entered or is there a bar to be achieved at ‘mock’ exam time to be allowed to enter.

These results also cannot identify any time candidates spent either on tutoring during the course or cramming during the Easer break before the actual examinations.

I am not sure whether the institutions classified as ‘City Training Colleges’ are actually ‘City Technology Colleges’. If so, it is not clear where UTCs and Studio Schools have been located? Possibly, along with the academies group or do they make up the ‘other group’ and does ‘other’ include special schools.  Why Free Schools merit a separate line under a Labour government is an interesting question.

It is also not clear whether the further education establishments (not Sixth Form Colleges) include entries from adults as well as those that would be in Year 13 if at a school? Certainly, anyone thinking of doing ‘A’ levels at a college might want to ask about the grades achieved by students at the college. The eight per cent gap to a comprehensive school for those gaining the top grades in a further education establishment and the nearly nine per cent gap for Grade C and above merits questions if faced with the choice. However, an earlier post noted, there are differences in the percentage of candidates achieving top grades between different subjects, and that may well be a factor in the outcomes.

This year, boys outperformed girls for the first time since 2018. There have also been different rates of improvement when comparing percentages achieving the top grades by type of institution. Without knowing what types of institution are classified as ‘other’ it is difficult to account for the decline in outcomes for the top grades for these schools.

Provider% difference 2025 on 2023
Free schools4
Secondary modern school/high school2.7
Secondary selective school2.3
Independent school including city training colleges (CTCs)1.9
All state-funded1.7
Academies1.6
Sixth form college1.5
Secondary comprehensive1.3
Further education establishment0.7
Other-2.3

It would also be integrating to compare the different types of intuitions by their outcomes by region.

Headteacher vacancies: even in August

Posted on by
Reply

More than 40 years ago, I first started counting heads. That’s actually headteacher vacancies, not actual heads. With some spare time on my hands, I thought that I would go back to my roots and look at what is the current state of play this August?

Of course, August is a quiet month, and there are currently fewer than 60 headteacher vacancies listed on the DfE website that is the main go-to place these days, just as the TES was in the 1980s.   

The DfE vacancy website still contains some of the flaws created when it was established. Anyone trying to use modern methods of’ scraping’ jobs will come across the random duplication outcome that has been a feature of the site ever since its inception. I am not sure whether it was deliberate or a fault in the coding, but it always used to annoy me when I was running TeachVac to see the same job repeated in the listing more than once.

The alternative, pioneered by TeachVac was to ‘scrape’ school websites where schools placed their jobs. However, for obvious reasons, not all schools placed headship vacancies on their website. Presumably not to let staff and parents know of the impending departure of their headteacher.

At least with headteacher posts, there is no problem deciding whether the vacancy is a repeat listing or a re-advertisement. Headteacher posts are unique, and thus easy to track.

Anyway, what did I learn from collecting the first 50 vacancies? Special schools were over-represented, with eight such schools looking for a headteacher this August. As a part of the White Paper on SEND, I hope that the government will consider the staffing and training of staff for the special school sector that has long been a Cinderella, and if not bullied by the bigger primary and secondary sectors, it is certainly still in search of a fairy godmother.

There are only two secondary schools in the list, and one is a 10-14 school, and the other a private school. That doesn’t surprise me, as secondary schools usually sort out headship vacancies well before the start of the school year. If there is an unexpected vacancy, then there is often a deputy head that can ‘act up’ until an appropriate time to advertise the vacancy.

Of the 50 or so primary schools, including one First School, 17 were faith schools: ten Roman Catholic; six Church of England and one other Christian faith. These numbers don’t surprise me in the least; indeed, I would have been surprised if there were fewer Roman Catholic schools in the list. All the years I monitored headteacher vacancies, Roman Catholic schools often featured prominently in any listings. 

The relative absence of schools from London and much of the South East is interesting, but I need more data to say anything else than that.

Almost all schools provide a starting salary, either as a point on the scale or as a cash sum. One academy adds 5% to the quoted salary. The indication of a starting salary is an improvement over the time when schools rarely quoted a starting salary for those interested in becoming their headteacher.

Whether I keep us this task will no doubt depend upon how much else I have to do, but it was interesting retracing my footsteps.

.

Less than 400 teachers of physics entered service in 2023/24

Posted on by
Reply

As a result of the latest data from the DfE, it is now possible to start to see the consequences arising from the collapse in ITT recruitment to secondary courses in 2023/24.

It is interesting to compare the turnaround from the improvement in recruitment brought about by the covid epidemic with the poor recruitment figures for just three years later.

Year Achieved QTSAchieved QTSDid not achieve QTS% Did not achieve QTS
2017/182549013045
2018/192640213485
2019/202754211914
2020/213070616065
2021/222971522417
2022/232243718408
2023/242121015507

Initial teacher training performance profiles, Academic year 2023/24 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The reduction in numbers achieving QTS (Qualified Teacher Status) from 30,706 in 2002/21 to 21,210 in 2023/24, a reduction of some 8,500, or more than a quarter in just three years, goes some way to demonstrate the depth of the problems with recruitment schools faced in September 2024 and even more so in January 2025.

Hopefully, these numbers represent the lowest point for secondary trainee numbers over the next few years, after adjusting for the changes in targets that result from falling rolls in schools.

The data on the percentage achieving QTS might suggest that when it is difficult to recruit trainees, more marginal candidates are offered a place by training providers, and, as a result, the percentage not achieving QTS increases.

Because the DfE only records those with QTS teaching in a State-Funded ‘school’ it does not count those employed in a Sixth Form College or other further education college and, does not count any teachers from the cohort with QTS working in the private school sector. This latter omission might account for why only 49% of those trained to teach Classics were teaching in a State-Funded school.

SubjectPostgraduate
2023/24
Number of trainees
TotalAchieved QTSTeaching in a State-Funded School (of those achieved QTS)Teaching in a State-Funded School (of those achieved QTS)
Classics69673349%
Physical Education1,4851,43896567%
Primary9,3788,7126,27172%
Business Studies22720114673%
Art & Design40138228675%
Computing41337428275%
Total22,76021,21015,92175%
Modern Foreign Languages1,02497073976%
Other32731023776%
Drama24622717577%
Physics54048537377%
Secondary13,38212,4989,65077%
Geography82277160178%
Chemistry76469154479%
Mathematics1,9001,7621,38579%
Biology88581865280%
Music23722317980%
Design & Technology57654043781%
English2,2102,0621,66181%
History97791974481%
Religious Education27925821282%

It is interesting to note that the percentage of those trained to teach physics teaching in a State-Funded school was the same as the overall average, at 77%. However, that meant that there were only 373 new physic teacher entrants into State-Funded secondary schools from this cohort. It would be interesting to know the routes these 373 took before taking up their initial posts? How many of these 373 were from the PG Salaried High Potential ITT route? (Better known as Teach First).

The relatively small percentage of physical education trainees recorded as working in State-Funded schools may well be a result of the numbers recruited into training compared with the target.

Where trainees are required to pay a tuition fee for a course, what responsibility does the government and the course provider have to the trainee to ensure that there are not way too many trainees for the number of vacancies likely to arise? If this means that the student debt is less likely to be recovered, is this a waste of public money?

In a future post I will explore some other aspects of this dataset.

Windfall profits and SEND

Posted on by
Reply

There is no doubt that the rise in demand for special school places over the past few years was neither anticipated nor effectively dealt with by the State. One consequence is that large amount of off-balance sheet debt being carried by many local authorities responsible for schooling in England. Another consequence, highlighted by the Liberal Democrats in a press release issued today, is what might be described as the ‘windfall’ profits being made by a few in the SEND sector. Lib Dems demand cap on SEND providers profits as top firms rake in £100m – Liberal Democrats

When the highest paid director of a company operating both care homes for children and special schools is paid over £300,000, or more than twice the salary of a Director of Children’s Services commissioning the use of places in the schools and homes, it seems sensible to question whether such use of public money should continue.

At this point, I must make clear that I am a capitalist. The 40 years I have traded on my own account and through a company, as well as held a portfolio of investments in other companies. However, there are two issues that concern me. Where should the boundary line between services offered by the State and those run by the private sector be drawn? And how should price be determined?

It is interesting, as I have noted before, that in the USA and many other countries, public transportation is just that: a service run by the State. In England it has become a battleground between the State and private enterprise and the differing political opinions. Most would expect SEND to be a public service.

What often seems to be lacking is a mechanism to regulate the costs of suppliers to the State. When the private sector funds its enterprise by borrowing to provide the services and then expects the State to service that debt with a profit element added, it seems to me like time to take the service out of the private sector, and back into public provision.

In the case of SEND school places, national and local government should work together to prove places in state-run schools that would obviate the need for private sector intervention. This means the State, in this case the DfE, being much more interventionalist than has been the case.

The Liberal Democrats, of which I am a member and activist, noted in their press release that

‘Research commissioned by the party and carried out by the House of Commons Library showed that the top handful of profiting companies each took home tens of millions a year. One Group, operators of 28 special schools, turned over just over £200 million a year, making £44 million in profit – a margin of over 20%. That profit is 150% what the company made in 2022.’

How many more teachers might the £44 million have funded? While we wait for the government to produce a White Paper on SEND, perhaps the Local Government Association should set up a taskforce to remove the need to use the private sector.

I am sure that when John Stuart Mill, the nineteenth century philosopher, said that’ it was the duty of the State to see it citizens were educated, not to educate them itself’ he did not expect the cost to the State to be more than a reasonable amount.

NEETS: Why is London so different to the rest of England?

Posted on by
Reply

London seems to be a different world to much of the rest of England when it comes to looking at a range of different indicators about education. The latest one where the statistics raise an interesting question is the percentage of 16- and 17-year-olds that are NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training).

With the raising of the suggested ‘learning leaving age’ to eighteen (the official age is still sixteen) it is expected that almost all students in what is Years 12 and 13 should be in some form of certified education or training. The DfE asks local authorities for data each year bout the percentage participating in education or training and produces scorecards on-line. I wonder how many local authority scrutiny committees ever see this data? Participation in education, training and NEET age 16 to 17 by local authority, Academic year 2024/25 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The scorecard for Oxfordshire can be found at Oxfordshire_neet_comparator_scorecard.pdf

Looking through the data for all local authorities for both 2019 and 2025 what struck we was there was a definite London effect. 28 London boroughs had higher participation rates in 2025 than in 2019. For the rest of England there were only 37 other local authorities with higher participation rates in 2025 than in 2019.

One explanation is the inclusion of ‘no data’ in the NEETs percentage. As the DfE noted;

 ‘NEET/not known rates at the end of 2024/start of 2025 ranged from 0.0% City of London to 21.5% in Dudley. Dudley’s rate includes 2.4% NEET and 19.1% activity not known.’

So, either London boroughs are better at collecting the data – quite possible, given their relatively small size and close geographical cohesion, or there is something else going on.

On the other hand, only seven ‘shire counties’ had higher participation rates in 2025 than in 2019.  Might the decimation of rural bus services and the effect of a punitive motor tax on those without a no claims bonus be something to do with this change? Could it be that in large counties there are no longer the staff to badger multi-academy trusts (MATs) to provide accurate data about the destination of Year 11 leavers?

I think the DfE data should make clear both the known percentage of NEETs and the percentage of the age group where these is no data available. Perhaps, there might be a scorecard of MATs to identify those that provide high quality data, and those where hard pressed local authorities have to waste time and money chasing the data.

With the job market looking increasingly challenging over the next few years, and fewer incentives for employers to offer jobs with training to school leavers, the percentage of NEETs is an issue that needs more visibility, especially with the rapid growth in EHCPs. Will the significant increase in young people with mental health issues result in more NEETs, and if so, will London be different?

Homelessness and schooling

Posted on by
Reply

Is the education of children made homeless well enough safeguarded? Compared with the education of children in some of the world’s worst trouble spots, this may seem like an irrelevant question to ask of society in England. However, as a recent report from a House of Commons Select committee has made clear there is more that we can do in this country for this group of young people. England’s Homeless Children: The crisis in temporary accommodation

I am slightly surprised that the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee didn’t decide to conduct a joint inquiry with their colleagues at the Education Select Committee on this topic, but, perhaps, they initially didn’t think that schooling would be an important feature of their report.

Homlessness almost always means a move from one accommodation to another. For a school-aged child this can have one obvious consequence; their status has changed. This change in status isn’t something the family is likely to share easily with the school, although I suspect sensitive primary school class teachers and heads will notice the change fairly quickly. In secondary schools, unless the class tutor picks up on the change, it may well go unnoticed until it becomes an issue.

The most likely issue for schools is that the change in accommodation may mean a different, and possibly longer route to school. This might mean children that used to arrive on time may now be late through no fault of their own. The temporary accommodation might also not provide adequate space for learning and homework, so that might deteriorate as well. How schools deal with this situation explains a lot about their policies and the values behind them.

In more extreme cases, homelessness means that a child must change school mid-year, with all the attendant bureaucracy that entails. The Select Committee were concerned that there was no requirement to inform schools.

‘Currently, schools are not always notified when a pupil becomes homeless or changes school due to a move into temporary accommodation. This prevents schools from offering additional support which those children may require. Similarly, GPs are often unaware that families are experiencing homelessness, leaving an incomplete picture of the health impacts of homelessness on children’

The Committee recommended that

‘As the Government seeks to establish ‘consistent identifiers’ for children through its Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, it should ensure that these can be used as a formalised notification system, so that a child’s school and GP are alerted when they move into temporary accommodation.’ Page 30

At least the current Bill before parliament will stop academies and Trusts from stonewalling on accepting in-year admissions.

I would go further an require a child moving school to be placed on the roll of a virtual school run by the receiving local authority, if a school place could not be identified within two weeks, regardless as to how long or short the period of homelessness might be. Children need some degree of support and continuity and to see that their schooling is important to those responsible for supporting the family.

Class matters more than ethnicity

Posted on by
Reply

The end of the summer term is a curious time to announce an inquiry into White working-class kids in schools. The inquiry seems to be funded by private finance, but with government backing. Members revealed for white working-class kids inquiry

Two former Secretaries of State will be on the board, along with a DfE official, as well as many others representing the great and the good in schooling, but not perhaps either the churches or representatives of the under-fives lobby.

As SchoolsWeek pointed out in their news item, this is not the first such inquiry into the achievements or lack of them, of this group in society.  Indeed, the House of Commons Select Committee has had two goes at the issue, in 2014 and 2020. HC No

As well as the Select Committee’s reports, and the evidence submitted to the Committee, The inquiry might also like to read the DfE’s Report on outcomes by ethnicity Outcomes by ethnicity in schools in England – GOV.UK published before the pandemic.

I am sure the inquiry will focus on what works, and no doubt discuss issues about what is being measured and over-reliance on Free School Meals data. They will also need to discuss the issues around definitions, as society has become much both more complex, and more polarised. The measurement of children – I prefer the term to kids – of mixed heritage has added many more sub-categories to the original list.

However, I cannot help thinking that the focus of the inquiry is wrong. All the evidence suggests that of the three factors of race, gender and class, it is the third one that really matters. Yes, they are often inter-related, but looking at socio-economic data it is often schools in deprived areas, regardless of the ethnicity of their pupils that fare less well in school performance table.

Is this due to the funding arrangements. Some areas, notably London, are better funded than other parts of England. Is it down to teacher deployment and the market system. Do the best teacher seek to work in the most challenging schools or those with the best outcomes. How much does support from home matter. Can poor teaching be overcome with support and tutoring from home. All these were issues considered by the Select Committee. Then there are issues such as school attendance and what happens at the Foundation State if pupils miss vital building blocks in language and mathematics. Does the class teacher system help or hinder these children?

In terms of funding, what effect has the Pupil Premium had on outcomes, and is there any evidence that where academies can pool the funds of all schools and move resources between schools whereas local authorities cannot do so that this arrangement can boost outcomes in traditionally under-performing schools?

I guess one measure is the percentage of pupils on Free School Meals across the country that pass the tests for selective schools. Will the inquiry suggest a fully comprehensive secondary school system? If not, how will it address this injustice.

I am disappointed that it has taken this Labour government a year to start the process of addressing this issue. What were they doing in opposition? After all, the Liberal Democrats pushed the Pupil Premium right for the start of the coalition in 2010, as it had been in their manifesto.  How much does this government really care about those children that don’t achieve their full potential for whatever reason.