Back to top arrow icon Back to top
  1. Home
  2. Agenda item
 Menu

Agenda item

Alternative Provision Strategy (20.40)

To update the Commission on plans to develop a new Alternative Provision Strategy for Hackney.

Minutes:

6.1  Hackney Education is developing a new Alternative Provision Strategy for children who are unable to receive education in mainstream schools. Officers presented the report which included the principles, plans and timelines for the development of this strategy.  Key points from the presentation included:

·  AP has meant many different things to different sections of the education system over many years which has impacted development;

·  On the whole AP has been on the periphery of local education systems but this needs to change with a more integrated role;

·  The AP strategy will repurpose what is already available, and make sure there are more options available to young people which are flexible and responsive to their needs;

·  There must be a graduated alternative provision system to extend the options for schools so that more on-site and off-site options are available to children.

 

Questions from the Commission

6.2 How will the new strategy ensure that Alternative Provision commissioned and utilised for young people will be of high quality and configured to meet their needs? What systems will be used to review and monitor the quality of Alternative Provision? Will this be a shared QA system with other LA’s?  Will this also include the physical state of some of the buildings used by AP?

·  The current QA framework used by the authority needs to be improved. There are 13 national benchmarks which cover relationships as well environmental issues.  In collaboration with the PRU, a more localised set of standards have been developed which will be consulted upon and trialled over the next few months to March 2024.

·  It will be important to move forward from behavioural policies toward relational policies, which encompass and work across all tier 1, tier 2 and tier 3 educational settings so that there is a unified and consistent approach.

·  The DoE noted that all 151 local authorities will need to have regard to the National SEND and AP Action Plan and will be redesigning provision in this context.  There will be an expectation that all schools will go through a graduated response before any decision is made about exclusion.

 

6.3 One of the failings of the current system is that there is very little connection between mainstream schools and alternative provision.  How will the new alternative provision strategy support greater collaborative and partnership working between schools and alternative provision? How do you expect schools to respond to this strategy and their response will be critical to this success?

·  There is a real need for guidance for the maintained sector in how it interrelates with the AP sector, and there is some expectation that AP should lead on this agenda.  School engagement will be the catalyst for change. There has also been some assessment of the role of the Fair Access Panel, in the hope that its brief can be expanded to encompass children from a managed move or referral to the PRU, EBSA and other areas where the needs of children needs to be addressed in deciding the next steps.

 

6.4 Educational attainment and outcomes for children in Alternative Provision are substantially below counterparts in mainstream schools (<4% receive good GCSE pass in English and Maths compared to 64% in mainstream schools).

·  Narrowing the Gap is a key programme to reduce gaps in attainment for children in certain settings (AP or children with SEND).  This is on the forward plan and Hackney Education will be bringing a paper on this to the meeting in March 2024.  This data will be shared fully with the Commission at that point.

 

6.5 What will the role of the PRU be in the new AP Strategy? Will the PRU continue to Commission AP or will this be undertaken by the Local Authority?

·  It is the recommendation of the strategy that the authority takes over the Commissioning role of the PRU in the short to medium term (2-3 years).  In terms of the proposed hub and spoke model, the PRU will be central but it will be repurposed.

 

6.6 The Chair thanked officers for attending and responding to questions from members of the Commission.

Supporting documents: