Balancing Conflicting Pressures - Recognising the Value and Place of Independent Specialist Provision in England
Heather Stack
Change Strategist, Programme Manager, Global Insights Analyst (SEND, social care)
This past six months has seen a plethora of reports into the financial crisis facing the SEND system in England: the National Audit Office report on Value for Money (October 2024), the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Spending on special educational needs in England (Dec 2024); the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (Jan 2025) published a report into the unaffordable state of finance for SEND, warning of a 'lost generation' of children leaving school without receiving necessary support.
Today, Schools Week have published a report into the failings of independent specialist schools, claiming that many remain open yet have failed Independent School Standards.
Private special schools charging ￡100k fees failed standards checks. Labour wants new powers to intervene quicker when private schools fail. But how many have not met standards, and why?
This article aims to unpick some of what is going on and give balance to increasingly divisive and inflamed rhetoric around the value and use of independent specialist providers.
What is the crisis?
At its simplest, the current system of funding SEND provision in England's local authorities is unsustainable. We have been witness to this crisis mounting the past decade, with greater urgency in recent years. The number of councils declaring financial difficulty, or with an escalating High Needs Block deficit, or on Delivering Better Value or Safety Valve schemes, is evidence of that struggle to balance books.
When systems are fragile and at breaking point, there is a deep rooted instinct to look for scapegoats. We have a new Government which is a significant catalyst for change. There is a recurring rhetoric, seen in all recent reports, that one source of the problem, the scapegoat in this scenario, is the independent specialist sector, funded by private investment.
What are the Independent Schools Standards?
You can find more detailed information about Independent School Standards in the Dept for Education guidance, published April 2019. Here is an overview of the categories for inspection.
Roughly 20 per cent of non-associated private schools failed to meet the independent school standards in 2023-24,?Schools Week?analysis shows.
What does this statement mean in reality?
We could be forgiven for believing that 20% of private schools have failed to meet all ISS, and therefore, should be forced to close with immediate effect, following the line of argument in the Schools Week article.
The tone and rhetoric call for more decisive action to be taken against schools failing the ISS, and cite comments in the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, 2024, in support of this strong action.
Yet, many independent schools consistently meet all ISS, and do so against a context of remarkable challenge. Those that are classed as 'failing' by this reckoning, might in reality have failed one area of school standards, a context which is regrettable, but can arise for a multitude of factors and pressures.
Why is the cost of independent specialist provision used to shock?
A glimpse at LinkedIn comments on the Schools Week article give an indication of the level of knowledge that exists around independent specialist provision and associated costs.
Those who work at senior level in the SEND sector, or in commissioning or SEND services, will be familiar with the fee range, and with providers, the quality of their offer and part they play in local inclusion plans. References to cost, do not have the same power to shock.
For readers working across the breadth of education, cost as a scare tactic is a highly successful headliner. It is used as a call to arms, an incitement to take action and take back control. To close these settings down and resolve the whole crisis in one fell swoop.
As if it were as simple as that.
Information as an agent of fear
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report, published on January 15, 2025, compared the costs of independent specialist provision with state-maintained specialist provision in England.
This report highlighted significant cost differences between various types of educational settings for children with special educational needs and made the following cost comparison, further inflaming a sensitive situation:
Yet, with all due respect to the PAC, this is not comparing apples with apples. It is not a fair comparison. There are significant differences which impact fees, and those outside of the sector, purely looking at the accounting side of things, might rightly be perplexed, sharing statements that have headlined news articles ever since.
Apples for apples
To compare fairly, there would need to be a level playing field where all costs of provision are accounted for and matched equally.
Maintained special schools have the following benefits, cost avoidance & cost savings, compared to their independent sector counterparts:
Premises and grounds and ongoing management and maintenance of the site
Staffing, pay, pensions & other costs
Access to maintained specialist educational & health services, commissioned or in house, which may be autism services, learning difficulties, language & communication, attendance, behaviour, occupational therapy, educational psychology, clinical psychology, CAMHS, visual impairment, hearing impairment, physical disability and other specialist support teams
Access to in house, commissioned or DfE funded continuing professional development & SEND specific training.
In addition, it is rare to witness the high staff to pupil ratios of the independent sector, in the maintained sector. In some settings I've visited, that ratio may be as high as 6:1, with staff covering a 24 hour waking curriculum, incorporating health and social care staff as well as education and support staff.
Who bears the risk?
Councils fund “risky” schools
Schools Week claim that Councils fund risky schools. But who really is bearing the risk, and who is vulnerable to risk?
Many independent schools are last choice placements. They are rarely a first choice placement decision, but instead, these schools that bear the burden of high risk of placement breakdown, when all other options have been exhausted.
It is not uncommon for young people placed in the independent sector to have gone through multiple school placement breakdown, to have had significant time missing from education, to have moved from mainstream, to PRUs or Alternative Provision, to maintained specialist provision, and then, finally, into the stability of placement of residential or day specialist provision.
Independent specialist schools carry all the burden of risk. They do not have a standard one intake a year format, but are subject to requests for placement at any time of year, often at short notice, with next day placement requests not unusual.
The risks associated with urgent referrals and placement requests are high. Every new person entering the school poses a risk to the safety and wellbeing of other students, to the stability of classrooms and carefully planned learning and support.
领英推荐
Complexity of Need
In settings I've visited, across a range of independent advisors, the needs addressed are severe and complex, and rarely met in local authority maintained provision. They include:
Multiplicity of need, with complex learning difficulties, challenging behaviour, complex medical needs, acquired brain injury & other educational or health needs
Acute mental health needs, often, but not always, associated with other diagnosis
Criminalised behaviours, gang related violence, sexual exploitation, grooming, addictive behaviours and other vulnerabilities
Adverse childhood experiences, with many children & young people in independent provision looked after by the authority or having experienced a tumultuous personal and educational journey
Protections & Vulnerabilities
There are a host of protections afforded to specialist providers in the maintained sector, including the unfailing support of local authorities and of government departments, and a steady referral stream.
Poor Ofsted outcomes will rarely carry the risk of school closure, but instead, intensive and costly measures of support are put in place in the drive to improve standards.
In the Independent Specialist Sector, risk and vulnerabilities lie all around. They come in many forms, and include:
Government policy initiatives and agendas;
Funding risks, and loss of investment, or financial stability
A changing political and economic landscape, which can deter investors from funding specialist provision, or result in early exit plans
A persistent tension between the public and private sector, which frequently sets out to undermine the work of the independent sector
A lack of support from local authorities when Ofsted inspections point to weaknesses
The threat of a veto on new placements, or instant withdrawal of children already placed, either with no notice, or at Annual Review
Why we should all be concerned about the demonising of the independent specialist sector
For some children & young people, the independent specialist sector is a last port of call before entering the youth justice system, before serious harm from street crime, gang related violence or other vulnerabilities.
Outcomes are not good, for those considered for referral to this sector. There is unlikely to be any return to mainstream education, to higher education.
Life long opportunities may already be severely curtailed. Yet there is opportunity in this placement decision; there is possibility, and hope for the future, when that placement choice is a good one, providing stability and support in equal measure.
The challenges, for those working in the sector, are high. The risks for those who choose to invest in specialist education, are equally high. There is no local authority safety net when Ofsted exposes weakness in practice or policy.
We should all be deeply concerned when there is talk, as in the Schools Week article posted today, 17 February 2025, of a call to close specialist provision because it has failed to meet one or more ISS. Or to refuse to commission places at all settings across a provider network rather than cease temporarily, placements at just one setting.
Imagine the uproar if a Multi Academy Trust was told by multiple councils that there would be no more pupils placed at any of their settings, because one school within the group had a poor Ofsted outcome.
We should equally be concerned, and alert to, threats from Government to "better secure the timely closure of institutions that... are unable to fully meet the standards," and be mindful of how this statement is interpreted and used.
Future Horizons
I write this article as an independent consultant, with over three decades experience in the sector, aware of the many nuances to the challenges facing the SEND sector, and especially, the independent specialist sector.
Moreover, I have written this to call for more responsible reporting of matters concerning the SEND sector, and the thorny issue of the cost of independent specialist provision.
Perhaps, if local authorities invested in premises and in establishing residential 48 week, and 52 week care, there might be a better understanding of the challenges faced by this sector, and of the true cost of maintaining provision for some of our most troubled young people.
Author's Note
I write occasional articles on LinkedIn to share information on subjects that matter to me, always considering the perspective of children & young people for whom, life presents challenges. If there is anything that resonates, please do get in touch through LinkedIn or email, [email protected]