On 26 January 2017 the Welsh Assembly’s Children, Young People and Education Committee sought advice in respect of reforming how children and young people with Special Educational Needs (SEN) are supported.
Stakeholders were asked to respond to questions which covered the following areas:-
- Replacing the three-tier system with Individual Development Plans (IDPs) for all learners with ALN- What are the advantages and disadvantages of replacing the current three tier, graduated system with one where all learners with ALN are entitled to a statutory Individual Development Plan (IDP)?
- Responsibility for Individual Development Plans (IDPs): Governing body or local authority and does the Bill make it sufficiently clear when a local authority, rather than a school/college governing body, will be responsible for assessing a learner’s needs and for the learner’s IDP?
- A comprehensive, age 0-25 system- Is there enough focus in the Bill on ALN in early years and should young people undertaking work-based learning such as apprenticeships also be included if the Bill is to establish a comprehensive age 0-25 system?
- How adequate are the duties in the Bill in securing the necessary input and contribution from Multi-agency partners?
- Fairness, transparency and dispute resolution- How adequate are the Bill’s provisions for independent advocacy, disagreement avoidance and resolution and access to information and advice for learners with ALN and their families?
- Does the Bill provide the renamed Tribunal with enough powers and functions to carry out its role effectively?
- What will be the main challenges for implementation- financial or otherwise?
The Committee has now published a Summary of Evidence following the event. The participants welcomed aspects of the bill such as the equity in providing a 0-25 system and the the emphasis on all children and YP with ALN having the same opportunities for redress to the tribunal, although they did share some serious concerns that the proposed reforms to support are relatively ambiguous, and do not provide sufficient levels of accountability. See the responses here
The committee is currently seeking views from those who are affected by the proposed changes. Responses should be returned by the 24 February