Introduction:
Special Educational Needs (SEN) support is essential for students who require additional assistance to achieve their full potential. Two main approaches to funding SEN support have emerged – SEN delegated funding and statements. In this article, we will explore the differences between these two methods, as well as their advantages and disadvantages.
SEN Delegated Funding:
SEN delegated funding refers to the allocation of funds by local authorities to schools for providing additional support to students with Special Educational Needs. The funds aim to address a range of needs, with schools given the freedom to decide how best to use the resources allocated.
Advantages:
1. Flexibility: Delegated funding allows schools to make decisions on how best to allocate money according to their students’ needs, leading to tailored and individualized support.
2. Timely Support: As the funds are directly allocated, schools can initiate support without delays that may arise from a more centralized decision-making process.
3. Less Bureaucracy: The simplified process involves fewer administrative burdens on both schools and families compared to statements.
Disadvantages:
1. Inconsistency: With each school deciding on its approach, inconsistencies may emerge in the level and quality of support provided across schools.
2. Limited Accountability: Lack of external oversight can lead to insufficient monitoring, resulting in less effective provision of resources.
SEN Statements / Education, Health, and Care (EHC) Plans:
Statements were previously used as legally binding documents outlining the specific educational needs of an individual student. These have now been replaced by EHC plans, which similarly specify the student’s needs alongside health and social care requirements.
Advantages:
1. Legally Binding: EHC plans are legally enforceable documents ensuring students receive appropriate support based on their individual needs.
2. Holistic Approach: By addressing educational, health, and social care aspects, EHC plans offer a comprehensive support framework.
3. Multi-agency Collaboration: The process for creating EHC plans encourages collaboration between various agencies, fostering a more coordinated approach to meeting the student’s needs.
Disadvantages:
1. Complicated Process: The assessment and development of statements or EHC plans involve a complex and lengthy procedure, involving multiple stakeholders.
2. Limited Availability: As these plans are reserved for students with the most severe and complex needs, they are not accessible to those who may still require additional support but do not meet the criteria.
Conclusion:
Both SEN delegated funding and statements (now EHC Plans) aim to address the needs of students with Special Educational Needs. While delegated funding offers flexibility and simplification, it may lack consistency and accountability. On the other hand, statements and EHC plans provide more comprehensive support through a legally binding document, although they involve lengthy processes and are reserved for those with severe and complex needs. A balanced approach that considers the unique context of each school and student is necessary for providing inclusive and effective support.
