1. Commissioning and the Children and Families Act 2014 Claire Dorer - NASS

2. Key SEN Changes Statements of SEN replaced with Education, Health and Care Plans Statements of SEN replaced with Education, Health and Care Plans Single assessment process Single assessment process Duty on Health to jointly commission and provide services Duty on Health to jointly commission and provide services Plans can be in place from birth to 25 years old (if remaining in education) Plans can be in place from birth to 25 years old (if remaining in education) Parental preference strengthened and right to express preference for Non-maintained and Independent Special Schools along with Special Academies and Free Schools Parental preference strengthened and right to express preference for Non-maintained and Independent Special Schools along with Special Academies and Free Schools Local Authorities will have to produce a Local Offer of services generally available in their area Local Authorities will have to produce a Local Offer of services generally available in their area Parents can opt for personal budgets and direct payments for some services Parents can opt for personal budgets and direct payments for some services

3. Joint Commissioning Duty LAs and Health and Wellbeing Boards have a duty to jointly commission services for children and young people with SEN and Disabilities The joint commissioning arrangements must include arrangements for: Securing Education, Health and Care assessments; Securing the education, health and care provision specified in EHC plans; and Agreeing personal budgets.

4. Who Pays? Left to LAs and HWBs to decide who funds what – can pool resources but no duty to do so.

5. The Local Offer Will include services across education, health and social care Each LA will have to publish a Local Offer annually, setting out what services it generally expects to be available for children, young people and families from its area Will need to include services regularly used but located outside area e.g. NMISS Must involve children, young people and families

6. Personal budgets All parents have right to request a personal budget for their child. In some cases, this may be given as a direct payment Budgets cannot purchase whole school places To date, most budgets used for transport and shot breaks Parents who directly commission services, take responsibility for their delivery – but the la maintains responsibility for overall delivery of Education, Health and Care Plan

7. What are the key LA challenges? In general, Local Authorities maintain accountability but will have less control over what is delivered and how, as more power moves to parents Commissioners key to success – how far have they been involved? There is a focus on a local agenda but most LAs are likely to have to work collaboratively to commission services Working more closely with other agencies Needs to be delivered at a time of diminishing economic and staff resources

9. Expectations created by the Children and Families Act Parents – more choice, more control, better access to services Schools – more parity between different types of school – all now statutory partners of placing and host LAs; placements driven increasingly by parental choice Local Authorities – need to mange finite resources

10. Parents as commissioners Parents will be exercising increased choice over their child’s school placement Increased expectations of Education, Health and Care Plans delivering more personalised, child- centred services … and up to age 25! Personal budgets and direct payments will lead to parents being direct commissioners and/or procurers of some services e.g. short breaks – how do LAs and schools monitor service delivery and outcomes?

11. Expansion of parents’ rights to express a preference for a specific school Currently applies to maintained schools only – parents can request another type of school but LAs do not have to meet this request Bill gives parents the same right to express a preference for all “state funded” special schools including academies, free schools, non-maintained special schools and approved independent special schools LAs will have to meet that request unless: The school cannot meet the needs of the child or young person The placement is an inefficient use of resources When a school is named in the Education, Health and Care Plan it has a duty to admit that child or young person

12. How do we view this? Schools Parental choice may lead to more placements Demonstrating relative costs of packages of support will be key task Why bother with frameworks and tenders? We are part of LAs’ Local Offers? Local Authorities Concern about budget pressures Wish to continue to treat SEN placements in similar way to independent homes and fostering – frameworks key Need to follow EU Procurement rules

13. 2014 EU Procurement Directive Removes ‘Part B’ services Raises threshold of contract value to 750,000 Euros Requires contracting authorities to make pre- qualification as straightforward as possible BUT Contract awards made without procurement would be considered legally void

14. Why is this a problem for SEN Commissioning? Contract values are cumulative e.g. value of all placements in a specific setting over entire life of placement – threshold will be met in majority of specialist placements. Rules apply equally to non-maintained and independent special schools, academies, free schools and inter-authority placements in LA schools Parental choice under the Children and Families Bill may not be realised if LA has not been through procurement with chosen placement.

15. The Government’s proposed solution … Recognise that something must be done to make parental preference a reality Seeking to create either one, or several, ‘pseudo frameworks’ by which they will pre-qualify all SEN providers (mechanisms as yet unknown) LAs can then make placements without a requirement to go through further procurement activity – duties under Directive will have been met

16. Where does this leave LAs? We want to place with high quality schools Still want to be able to have more control over Contracts and costs Elected members require us to get value for money from placements We want to be able to specify outcomes Frameworks are still the way to go

17. Where does this leave schools? Targeting energies towards Local Offer listings and work with prospective parents Confident in many cases that cost to public purse of placements is economically efficient Belief that all LAs end up making placements off framework Small and medium sized schools lack capacity to engage in procurement activity with all placing authorities We won’t compete for tenders unless we can see no other option

18. Where do we go from here?

19. What do we have in common? Wish to see best possible outcomes for children and young people Wish for cost-effective services and clarity about who is delivering what service at what cost Wish to have access to evidence to demonstrate success

20. Key areas for collaboration Supply and distribution of services Methods of referral Understanding of costs Clear outcomes for children and young people Reviewing progress Monitoring contracts

21. Leading to … Consultation with providers via Local offer requirements Development of new local services e.g. franchises, free schools, resourced units Collaboration to agree best means of measuring progress and outcomes Local Offer supplemented by ‘preferred provider’ arrangements where LAs can still highlight high quality provision

22. Still going for a framework 1? Are you including all SEN providers in your framework – if not, how do you justify this? Are you launching your framework from a strong needs assessment? Does this mean you only need to tender for high volume/high spend areas in your authority/region? Can you operate a DPS where the framework remains open to new providers?

23. Still going for a framework 2? How can you make competing as simple a process as possible e.g. using National Contract, only requiring some information at a later stage of progress where success is more likely Can you secure all provision needed via your framework? If not, how do you work with schools off the framework? How do you balance carrot and stick? Why is it worth schools competing?

24. Schools – to compete or not compete? More attractive when LA or region is major placer or children or you wish to move into area Some schools report frameworks can lead to better relationships with LAs Where most placements are not driven by parental preference, LA referrals will remain important

26. Over to you … LAs – what are you planning to do with SEN Commissioning? Schools – how will you respond to invitations to tender? How do we work together in securing best outcomes? What works in bringing purchasers and providers together?