Free schools all notes draft 190616

19th June 2016

An invitation to Conversation and Consultation …new, local, specialist school provision and overnight short break care for Kingston and Richmond A total of 51 parents/carers attended, and 6 from other organisations, attended four meetings. These were robust debates and a lot of good ideas came from then. John Kipps (Headteacher, Clarendon) and Ivan Pryce (Headteacher, Strathmore) impressed many of the parent attendees with their evident passion and care in providing excellent new provision.

Whilst there are many themes emerging from these debates, there are two that continue to stand out more than any other are: 1. Quality of provision 2. Staff retention (therefore consistency of care & therapies)

“Thank you for organising this meeting, I thought it was fantastic. I’m very happy indeed at the prospect of new SEN schools.” Parent “Good to hear breadth of opinion in the room. However, decisions have to be made on what these schools offer…” Parent “A school sinks or swims on the calibre of staff within it. My child is in a school with 60 acres, but the ever changing staff & therapists make this meaningless.” Parent

Summary Key Principles for new provision         

Quality of provision matters more than anything else Good staff retention (= consistency of care & therapies) Well trained therapists Suitability for the child / young person Flexibility to personalise provision Well trained staff Small classes Local provision is desirable, however; Location matters less than all the above

Actions  

Agree notes. SFV A questionnaire will be sent to all. Questionnaire designed by SFV, Auriga & AfC. AfC to manage logistics.

   

Criteria for assessment includes: “You provide compelling evidence that you have engaged successfully with a high proportion of the local community and adapted your proposal in response to feedback if necessary” Suggestion is that the first two key principles can be responded to by John & Ivan (on behalf of Auriga) and this response included within the initial application. All Continue with the wider consultations. Auriga & SFV Create a Steering Group to inform Auriga’s proposals on the Free Schools & Residential proposals. SFV & Auriga

Outstanding questions  

Broader statement on SEN Strategy – how do these proposals fit into the wider provision planning across the two borough? ACTION: AfC (SJ) Provision for Moderate Learning Difficulties (MLD) and other ‘hidden disabilities’ (eg high functioning autism and adhd). These children do not fare well in mainstream secondary school (especially from Year 8 / 9 onwards). How will they be catered for? ACTION: AfC (SJ)

Contents - detail Part 1: Who’s Who & stats Data sources Profile Who’s Who

Part 2: Raw data Meeting Notes  

Notes on Notes Context

Key Headings          

Therapies Quality / Sustainability / Staff retention Curriculum Curriculum more..

Social aspects & MLD Local and Co-location Respite (& residential) Practicalities Other questions Consultation & Funding

Telephone queries to date E-mail queries to date

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

Part 1: Who’s Who & Stats Data Sources ‘Scratch Notes’ - from SEND Family Voices - combined from: Monday 23rd May Wednesday 8th June Thursday 9th June Monday 13th June

10:30am – 12:00pm 7:00pm – 8:30pm 10:30am – 12:00pm 7:00pm – 8:30pm

Studio, York House, Twickenham, TW1 3AA Committee Room 1, Kingston, KT1 1EU Moor Lane, Chessington, KT9 2AA Terrace Room, York House, Twickenham, TW1 3AA

Telephone calls: x 3 – not named

E-mails: x 7 – anonymised – verbatim on final pages

Parent/Carer Attendees: Monday 23rd May Wednesday 8th June Thursday 9th June Monday 13th June

17 parent/carers 5 parent/carers 8 parent/carers 21 parent/carers

+ 1 non-parent/carers (SOS!SEN) + 2 non-parent/carers (ADHD R’d & Malden Oaks) + 1 non-parent/carers (Blossom Hse) + 3 non-parent/carers (SOS!SEN)-1 MS came twice

Total attendees

51 parent/carers

+ 6 non-parent/carers

There was some feedback after the meetings that, in future, it could be better to ensure the attendees are all parents/carers. The strong views of the non-parents/carers were felt to be daunting and not helpful to a constructive dialogue (ie some parents didn’t feel comfortable contributing in front of such forceful, professional opinion from non-parents/carers).

The suggestion from parents is to have a separate event for those who are not parent/carers themselves, but represent schools or support groups.

These notes are only being sent to parents & carers.

Profile Profile: 23rd May     

# attendees Ten have children in Out Of Borough schools There were also parents whose children are younger and/or were in ‘units’ attached to mainstream schools, and observed that they may benefit from new local provision in the future The ages of the children were not consistently given, so it’s not possible to say how many are in primary school, and how many are in secondary or further education There was a mix of disabilities represented (couldn’t notate fast enough) – with perhaps a slightly higher representation of autism

Profile: 8th June   

# attendees There was a mix of disabilities represented – with a slightly higher representation of autism The age ranges tended to be secondary school.

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

Profile: 9th June   

# attendees Once again, there was a mix of disabilities represented – this time, a higher representation of global developmental delay The age ranges tended to be secondary school.

Profile: 13th June    

# attendees A broadly mixed range of disabilities represented. Including severe and moderate learning difficulties, complex medical needs and autism.

The age ranges varied.

The current provision was mixed, from out of borough schools, to primary and secondary special and mainstream.

Who’s Who Chair: Romany Wood-Robinson, SEND Family Voices (x4 mtgs)

Presentations and Panel: John Kipps, Headteacher, Clarendon School (x4 mtgs) Ivan Pryce, Headteacher, Strathmore School (x3 mtgs) Zoe Williams, bid support, Achieving for Children (x4 mtgs) Ashley Whittaker, Project manager, Achieving for Children (x4 mtgs) Simon James, Assoc. Director SEND, Achieving for Children (x2 mtgs) Henry Kilpin, bid support, Achieving for Children (x1 mtg) Matthew Paull, Admissions, Achieving for Children (x1 mtg) Anna Chiva, Head of SEN Services, Achieving for Children (x1 mtg)

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

Part 2: Raw Data Meetings Context: See attached slides for full presentation.  RBK/RuT pupils with Statements/EHC plans increasing at a rate of 5-6% per year;  SLD increasing at 15%;  RBK/RuT higher than National average  2000 Statements/EHC plans: 1000 in Mainstream, 1000 in Specialist, 480 in Independent Some questions around why the increase in SLD; answer is often thought to be due to advances in medical care, so more pre-term babies surviving. Also, unusually high incidence of asd within AfC’s area.

Ashley explained the mechanism of the MAT and how this can lead to Free Schools. This is driven by central government policy; it’s a matter of taking advantage of the opportunities as they currently exist.

Auriga MAT would go live in September (with existing schools). Plans to build 2 new primary Free schools and 2 new secondary Free schools are an additional proposal.

John Kipps: Plan is not to bring young people back in to borough, but this may happen at “phase change” times (i.e. primary to secondary). All children are subject to annual reviews - that’s standard practice. However, no placement can change without the agreement of the family.

NB: There is no intention to forcibly move pupils. Any Free School would start with Year 7 and increase as the years go by. Note the figures for OOB in the slides are static.

Note on Notes These notes aim to be an accurate record of the discussions in the consultation.

All attendees, e-mail and telephone respondents are welcome to comment and request adjustments throughout the consultation.

These notes, alongside the key principles, will inform the application for new Free Schools in Kingston & Richmond.

Key Headings Therapies “A school sinks or swims on the calibre of staff within it. My child is in a school with 60 acres, but the ever changing staff & therapists make this meaningless.” Parent 

Therapies is a clincher… several parents noted the importance of consistent, well qualified staff. Staff that don’t leave and that get to know the child.

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616



                   

 

Intention is that therapies will improve if schools become academies. Instead of buying in therapists, they will be able to employ their own team. This is attractive to therapists in terms of their own professional developments (eg someone can be an expert in drooling, rather than generalist OT) There were questions about ABA – can this be included? Answer is ‘we have to look into this’ and anything raised in these meetings, must be explored further.

Home visits – Therapists in the holidays – Yes. Lots on ABA provision – Pear Tree was awful. Now massively improved. Need more like this please.

Where will all these therapists come from?

HRCH don’t pay enough We’re considering a Director of Therapies to oversee this…. Arts, Drama, Music, Psycho, Counselling etc Auriga have the potential to be a big employer; this gives more buying power and the possibility to become/develop a centre of professional excellence for therapists.

Therapies – therapies – therapies fundamential Non-starter without OT and SaLT What do parents expect? Therapies room please ABA and behaviour – how to manage this? Would would be able to buy in more Eps and more strategies…

Small classes – one therapist per class Therapies in school – need to be consistent, Therapist – hugely important – disappearing therapists is a huge problem Employed by Auriga Trust is an option where they have buying power…

Also offer other therapies: psychotherapy (FamilyWorks), Art Therapy, Music Therapy etc etc Yes- taken out of class. But also do provision map to see what works each year group More on ABA – so many parents want this. How to meet this need?

Discussion on local therapies and lack of OT. HRCH does not pay enough to hire and retain therapists. Auriga can be a bigger employer The recruitment and retention of well qualified, good staff is already difficult. How will new provision manage this?

The opportunities in being a ‘larger employer’ mean that Auriga could offer professional’s opportunities in being a part of a centre of excellence. This could include Auriga becoming a training centre for therapists. In particular, Occupational Therapists (OTs) as the UK does not routinely train OT’s in paediatric OT (notable Australia does) There were questions about ABA – can this be included?

ABA has been raised a number of times; as such the Auriga Trust must look into this provision.

“I know you will probably not want to make it a full ABA school, but would like to ask you to at least consider having an ABA professional at consultant level (a BCBA) on school staff, and to incorporate ABA as a discipline alongside others such as SALT and OT.” Parent (via e-mail)

Quality / Sustainability / staff retention “Quality is of paramount importance” Ivan Pryce, Head, Strathmore     

Majority of staff to be qualified – teachers, TAs, etc etc Existing expertise that we can share Recruitment; how will Auriga recruit staff from a relatively small pool? There aren’t enough therapists to go round.

Relating to Quality of Provision – if schools are not specific (eg asd) how can parents be sure they are not a jack of all trades, and a master of none?

A: Flexible offering, so that we can tailor the offer to suit the child (Heads described this as a “mixed economy”)

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

 

We want children/young people and their families to come to Auriga Trust Parents pointed out that they choose schools based on provision – best fit for child. One parent noted that what they would like is a forest location, three children per class, all similar needs, hydrotherapy on tap etc etc and that this is unrealistic.

“With more specialist expertise in Kingston and Richmond it would seem that there would be an opportunity to create centres of excellence that could be available as a resource to mainstream schools.” Parent (via e-mail)

Curriculum             

Curriculum will be differentiated to remove barriers to learning. (some discussion on executive function… = how brain processes information and learning & how this must be repeated for some) Will there be mixed age classes – based on ability? Where my child is now does this, and it allows daughter to achieve where her skills are exceptional. Eg IT We want children/young people and their families to come to Auriga Trust – so must make it attractive, high quality There will be wider consultation – this is just the first phase and we have exceeded requirements Talk of Waking Day curriculum [in residential setting] – ie not everyone operates 9-5 Take care… generic schools cannot suit all. Danger of Jack of All Trades What about mixing autistic children with neuro-typical peer group. How will this work?

A: Co-location of schools. Plus, shared expertise with local schools etc and training colleges 6 to 8 per year group. How are these selected? Chronological year groups. Then allow differences and differentiation once in – so to be with ‘learning peers’ NB it’s easy to have too many adults in a classroom Its variable according to the class. Some children need 2 adults. Some need less than 1 Uniform – OK, but it’s more important to have a happy, learning child – than one in uniform.

7 children per year isn’t very many… talk of local choices and need for capacity. SJ on trend analysis and predictions. Seven should be enough.



Curriculum more…    





Also – what about MLD? Some discussion that this is not being offer beyond mainstream and this is a real need. PEP model opening at Richard Challoner, but what about those who are not (even) at PEP level? Where do they go? John talked about more split placements.

Post-16 provision. How is this being improved? There is currently RuTC in Richmond – but many young people are just too vulnerable to attend a 6th form college (and the school 6th forms are selective) The floor agreed that one size does not fit all. It would be helpful to have more detail in these meetings – however, the discussions are not yet at that stage. AfC’s proposals are based on data – not necessarily life as lived by families. The emerging principles will aim to develop this detail.

John noted the concern voiced that the proposed free school might be too generic and was trying to meet the needs of too broad a range of needs? Over the next three meetings, it became clear that the Free Schools and Auriga Trust want to create a provision that is highly flexible and inclusive. The schools will do whatever is right for the child/young person.

Some asked whether or not the schools would be autism specific. The answer was No – as that would be an exclusive provision. Best practice for autism would be followed in all schools as required (and this is general best practice for all students). However if they could meet a child or young person’s needs, and that child did not have a diagnosis of autism, that child/young person would still be welcome.

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

 

Talk on high functioning autism – these children/young people don’t fit anywhere. SJ on PEP at RC. Talk of most post-16 courses being part-time – this is not suitable for SEND.

“...the child local social life and friendships are also curtailed by an out of borough provision.”

Social aspects & MLD 

 

      

Another parent of an MLD child observed that her child did not fit into any local provision – and that her child had an opportunity to live with some relative independence in a community that would know him and support him. By having to send her child out of borough, this was severely limiting the child’s long term outcomes as he was not building those important local networks.

And, also because her child is MLD, they don’t qualify for any short breaks activities, yet the child is too disabled to attend mainstream activities. So the child local social life and friendships are also curtailed by an out of borough provision.

Ref: MLD: Clarendon secondary & 6th form provision will be next to a new mainstream secondary school (REEC, Egerton Road, Twickenham) and RuTC. John Kipps is advising its SEN dept so more opportunities to have a mixed placement in the future. John felt confident that the leadership in the college are open to inclusion.

New mainstream school is planned to open Sept.2017 Link: http://www.reec.org.uk/ Where is MLD provision?

MLD cannot be shunted into mainstream provision. This isn’t fair.

Clarendon has changed its profile in John’s time – used to be that most could achieve 1 or 2 GCSE’s – now that’s not the case Where would those children go?

Provision for Moderate Learning Difficulties (MLD) and other ‘hidden disabilities’ (eg high functioning autism and adhd). These children do not fare well in mainstream secondary school (especially from Year 8 / 9 onwards). How will they be catered for?

Answer to follow

Governance                

Talk about how to access all four schools – how will they be joined together We have done our calculations and believe we can deliver an excellent provsion (via EFA & DSG) Where is the accountability. …

Explanation of governance/ heads etc Talked about current – happening – plans eg Egerton Road Val – closures re Newhouse. Offer is quite broad. Critical is more local options.

Malden Oak = 30% ADHD Need EHCP to go to Auriga Trust school. Not so for Malden Oaks.

Describe Whitton Gateway (under Clarendon) = average cognitive ability and asd, plus adhd Explained the Gateway: http://clarendon.richmond.sch.uk/provisions/gateway/ Explained REEC: http://www.reec.org.uk/ Parent Voices and Experiences is key in governance. We are very clear on this.

Uniform: Strathmore children, parents chose. Clarendon; young people chose. This is a result of abilities. (note news item; all girls can wear trousers and all boys can wear skirts at primary school – should they choose to) How is it funded = EFA: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/education-fundingagency/about The free schools cannot meet all needs – it’s about offering more choice. There may never be enough provision – but provision MUST increase.

JK – comment on re-banding of funds – special schools not had to go back to SEN Panel for more money.

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

   

Talk of Service Level Agreements – and size of schools… (5-8 form entry is toooo big). These schools will be small Questions on governance of free schools/ Governance of academies. There is a Regional Schools Commissioner for London / SouthEast who hold Academies/Free Schools to account Auriga Trust will have parents on its governing bodies. This is not a statutory requirement, but it is something the Trust feel strongly is the right thing to do. The slides illustrate the structure.

Kingston special schools already part of the Orchard Hill MAT. So not a part of Auriga Trust.

New provision will be for both Kingston and Richmond families.

Location & Co-location “My assumption is that co-location [with mainstream schools] is the best option for new provision. What do you think?” John Kipps, Head, Clarendon                      

John Kipps asked the similar about location – in his mind it would be to co-locate a school with a mainstream setting, which allows for integration AND discrete, self-contained provision at the same time.

A parent asked: Blossom House, for instance, is a small school. Are the Free Schools going to be ‘super-sized’ schools? No – refer to the slides for proposed pupil role.

Co-location offers opportunities. For inclusion… and also if a child/young person has a particular strength (eg Art or Science, they can attend classes with their peers Esp in Year 7 at Egerton Road site – there is the opportunity to move into the mainstream setting where children/young people feel comfortable Also – there would be planned inclusion (eg Sports Days) Important children don’t feel isolated and are part of a community school (co-location) For schools co-located – it can be important for young people to not stand out. It’s about making it work for the young person (not about applying school rules at the expense of the child/young person) Playing fields are very important – outdoor space. All should have the open space; if they want to use it.

How many adults to children with the classroom? Answer is 3:7 but Auriga would offer a flexible model depending on each year/class group Also important that children/young people learn to speak to each other not just adults (esp Strathmore) Key points = making best use of co-location. Co-creation of provision. Shared expertise and centre of excellent.

Conversation on asd specific or no?

Increase in provision is required – let’s make some of that choice local Can’t answer all problems – but can increase choice.

Will there be transfer between the schools? Yes. But all local Free Schools thus far have got terrible sites – how do you plan to be different?? (ie not in a car park?). A: ‘both councils are reviewing their portfolio’ (eg preferential) Why is it easier for Auriga? A: class sizes smaller. Q: but these children need more space, so what is the difference…?

Currently: 480 in OOB, 100 in residential Residential potential for this project = 15 residential places, 15 respite – across how many buildings??

A: This is still consultation – there so many unknowns. Got to start somewhere.

Detail on sites (current plans) – dependent on what Council’s propose. Then Auriga to negotiate Will It be, that in future, LA will want cheapest option – so will always choose local provision??

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616



     

All five sites co-located – these are the ones under way NOW. See link to publications on the Local Offer (go to pdf’s at the bottom of the page): https://www.afclocaloffer.org.uk/events/19857-an-invitation-to-conversation-consultation-newlocal-specialist-school-provision-and-overnight-respite-care-for-kingston-andrichmond?date=2016-06-09 Echo’ing of concern on Jack of all Trades A parent welcomed more special schools for their young child – nothing suitable locally and would rather have a local option.

Floor agreed that suitability is the key driver, not location. Most families want their children nearer, rather than further – but the suitability of provision is why parents will fight to get what their child needs.

Long school journeys for small children aren’t good for anyone. For the child = too tiring. For AfC = is a cost.

Opened the floor to parents for views on locations… location not key issues. Questions on whether AfC had sites in mind or not. Answer was unclear – both yes and no. It is likely to be an existing council owned site – and AfC are not able to dictate which site can be used.

NB: the terms of AfC’s commission with the Councils mean that AfC are not allowed to own buildings themselves.

Respite (& residential)       

 



How does residential work with Care package (more than one parent asked this) Will be great to have holiday and respite in the same place – a familiar place.

Somewhere to go.

Clarendon made the offer that their Youth Clubs re open to all… http://clarendon.richmond.sch.uk/learning-and-care/extra-curriculum/ Discussion on not-enough local respite – so children travel far to have complete package Residential provision is sought to encourage independence skills On occasion, respite is provided where families can’t cope (this does happen & is the minority) 24hour/7 days per week is a very real need for some young people. How is this being done?

Bexhill-on-Sea is a good example.

There is the possibility of residential provision in SLD Free School – site to be determined.

Suggestion that this should operate rather like a hotel – that parents can book their child in (eg saving up their direct payments, which allows for family to attend a wedding or similar that they could not do without suitable respite. This is instead of / in addition to the current need to qualify through eligibility criteria which will excludes some and not others.

John Kipps: Respite provision a possibility in conjunction with Strathmore expansion - hotel style high quality “like home"

Practicalities     

Build environments around the needs of the children - = appropriate calm environment (or not) Holidays & Insets – they will be the same as other local schools? Answer was Yes. What is the criteria for entry? Answer - That we can meet the child’s needs Note presentation – figure at the bottom (OOB) stays the same (ie not bringing children back into borough). There is an increasing need.

Other questions 

Broader statement on SEN Strategy – how does this discussion fit into wider picture (action SJ)

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

        

       

Discussion on matrix – to try and slot children in. Ain’t gonna work. All children different. Talk to SJ – re action point above Question re Strategy being joined up between both boroughs. Simon responded that these meetings are about a specific query on the Free Schools. This question came up again… broader statement has been requested from Simon & AfC How much of this idea has an effect on SEN Transport costs? Yes, some. But needs of children are priority. IF Auriga get this right – then yes, it should bring down other bills. Self-fulfilling – but can’t do it wrong.

Co-creation next.

These four meetings are the basis for further discussion.

Can new schools go to age 25 (as per EHCPs)?

How likely is that these Free Schools will go ahead? No certainty yet – but…and... movement There was some uncertainty as to how much of this is a done deal, and how much is up for debate.

It is all up for debate. Auriga Trust does not yet fully exist, and the proposal to include Free Schools is a part of this development. The propositions are being led by the Headteachers, with the full support of AfC. SEND Family Voices are leading the consultation work with families as this is a part of our ‘official’ remit within the DfE funding; to provide an independent, community voice.

Who is responsible for the EHCP? Answer is that it is the local council (where the child or young person is normally resident) – irrespective of where the school is located.

Can you send a questionnaire to all families please…

Discussion on why can’t AfC send e-mail questionnaire to all (current systems have limitations – that’s just the way it is) A questionnaire will be sent to all. Questionnaire designed by SFV, Auriga & AfC. AfC to manage logistics.

There is no intention from AfC or either of the Headteachers to remove children from existing provision. The predicted numbers of pupils show an increase in need, not a decrease in out of borough provision. That is: the intention is to increase choice by creating local provision.

Last words, from gentleman in left hand corner (at fourth meeting) …

“Good to hear breadth of opinion in the room. However, decisions have to be made on what these schools offer…” (Can’t always be up in the air)

Consultation & Funding 

   

Question raised about parental choices and how will these consultations be represented.

Answer = this is ongoing – this is just the beginning. These four meetings are to inform application to Central Government. Plenty more development work on content and curriculum to follow.

Question raised on funding- Ashley explained “there is one pot and it is a finite amount” Spend to save by creating in borough provision to save out of borough costs in future - but only if new provision is what parents want.

NB: Central Government / the law imposes an unlimited statutory duty in terms of funding SEN Provision. However, Central Government also impose limited budgets and the High Needs Funding Reforms is a hot topic at the moment.

High Needs Funding is a complex subject, and the first part of the consultations have been completed. Special Needs Jungle have an article, written for parents, which explains more: http://www.specialneedsjungle.com/parent-and-carers-guide-to-the-dfes-send-fundingconsultation/

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

 

Six members of the SEND Family Voices steering group have attended and contributed to a CDC / DfE debate on this subject (we keeping informed, and aiming to inform) Whatever happens locally, SEND Family Voices believe the best practice approach is to do develop new provision in transparent partnership with families.

Telephone queries to date   

x3 parent callers asking if their child will be expected to move if there is new provision. Also an explanation of what a Multi-Academy Trust is and why/how this is the move x1 recommended looking at Swiss Cottage in Camden as a good example x1 parents/a couple (have four children of their own) both went to special schools themselves.

Wanted to let SFV know what mattered to them. In essence: consistency of placement, no changes, going all the way through to YTS (Youth Training Schemes). No judgement or labels “we didn’t have autism in those days”. Couple think we need more local provision, not fair to send children away.

E-mail queries to date x7 “I will not be attending any of the meetings as my XXX is already 13 so unlikely to be of an age to take advantage of any new provision in the Kingston area. XXX attends XXX school which is very good at meeting XXX complex needs.” *********************** “Thank you for the invitation to the Conversation and Consultation dates for this proposal. I am delighted that this is being discussed as additional specialist provision is desperately needed in this area.

I am less impressed by the amount of notice for the daytime meeting in Twickenham. One working day is not a reasonable amount of notice to expect people to be available. This shows a huge lack of consideration, especially when the other dates are all after half term. Why does the first one need to be so rushed? [explained PostRoom problem – realise this is not good enough] I will try to attend one of the Kingston dates, but, as I definitely won't be able to attend either of the Twickenham dates (no babysitters for the evening one), I would like to submit some comments.

I would certainly like to have the answers to your own very valid questions listed in your letter.

Yes, I definitely agree we need new specialist provision in this area, although I do have major concerns as to where all the high quality, experienced staff will be recruited from, with so many new schools. As the existing and proposed mainstream schools are recruiting from a shrinking pool of experienced teachers, it is surely even harder to find teachers with the skills needed to work in specialist provision.

Also we already have Turing House trying to find a permanent location within the Richmond borough.

Are there suitable school sites available?

Within the specialist provision, there needs to be more recognition of hidden disabilities. For instance, ADHD, high -functioning ASD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, early trauma and attachment disorders all make it more difficult for children to cope in a mainstream setting. They need small nurturing schools which help them find their strengths, even if they are not academically gifted.

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

I suspect if these two schools go ahead, it will be too late for my [child] to benefit, but I certainly support the proposals and would be interested in any developments.” *********************** “Hi unfortunately I won't be attending this after all as I think it mainly applies to young children in more interested in 6th from next year. If you have any updates on these then I will make sure to attend one of the other meetings Thanks “ *********************** “I am a resident of Kingston and parent of a 6-year-old boy on the autistic spectrum who currently attends the unit at Knollmead primary school. I have read through your proposals on future special school provision and would like to make a number of comments:   

 







Overall, I think this is a very good initiative. It makes sense for both Kingston and Richmond councils and parents in those boroughs for children with SEN and disabilities to be educated inborough in the right facilities, with the right staff to suit their needs; I am glad to see that, in your proposal, you recognise the importance of small classes and speech therapists working alongside teachers and other support staff.

One of the schools should be an autism-specific school. There is a considerable gap at present in secondary school provision for those children with moderate to severe autism. These children often have significant communication difficulties but are cognitively able and have the potential to learn and achieve.

I think that some consideration needs to be made of how standards in these new schools would be maintained, if parents are not going to have recourse to options for out-of-borough education; With more specialist expertise in Kingston and Richmond it would seem that there would be an opportunity to create centres of excellence that could be available as a resource to mainstream schools. Provision for autistic children in the mainstream sector is, in my view, patchy. A part of this initiative should, therefore, be to ensure that SENCOs and leaders in mainstream schools have a better understanding of autism; Flexibility: The teaching and resources available to children on the autistic spectrum now are very different to what was available even ten years ago. When the proposed new schools are being built it would be worth asking the developers how they could create in-built flexibility so that the space can be adapted to new teaching techniques and equipment; Young adults: Given that local authorities now have responsibility for young adults on the autistic spectrum up to the age of 25 should the new schools also have provision for under-25s?

For example, a new autism specialism school is being built in Chigwell (Epping Forest District Council) by the Anderson Foundation in collaboration with the National Autistic Society. It includes, in addition to the school, a young adults learning centre which will provide young people with autism a chance to learn a trade. Could this model be copied - or at least considered - for Kingston and Richmond?

Consultation: I would be interested to know who else is being consulted on the plans for the new provision. There will be a cohort of children who are currently in the specialist units at primary level in the borough. The staff working with these children will have a very clear picture of their needs and the kind of setting they are likely to need in future and so will have valuable input to this consultation process. The speech and language therapists working across Kingston are an excellent source of knowledge and expertise, in particular; Shelley Natt.

Thank you for taking my comments into consideration.”

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616

*********************** “Hello, I am a Kingston mum with an autistic son age 13, Johnny, and I would like to offer my views on the forthcoming free school group?

I know you will probably not want to make it a full ABA school, but would like to ask you to at least consider having an ABA professional at consultant level (a BCBA) on school staff, and to incorporate ABA as a discipline alongside others such as SALT and OT. I am running a parent campaign called ABA Access4All, followed by 4000 parents, which is seeking to increase awareness and uptake of professional ABA in this country.

(Www.facebook.com/ABAaccess4all) Of course Kingston and Richmond are already ahead of the pack on ABA, with the Peartree unit run by the excellent BCBA Andy Swartfigure. But you may not be aware that other special schools, such as Eagle House in Sutton, are now also employing ABA staff to help children with autism?

For my part, my son responded so well to ABA (and not to standard education such as SALT, OT and Teaach) that I am pretty sure he would not now be talking or toilet-trained had I not moved to ABA. I suspect he might also still be aggressive or self-injurious. The parents on my campaign have similar stories.

Of course Kingston/Richmond already fund a fair few children in out-of-borough ABA schools such as Rainbow and Jigsaw (20 or more? A cost of £1 million or more per annum?) - so there would be a financial reason also to 'bring ABA in-house' in the borough.

Can I enclose a leaflet we parents have written on ABA? You may have heard bad stuff about ABA, as had I before trying it myself, but this leaflet aims to counter some of the myths. It really isn't as you've been told.

Thanks for reading.” *********************** “Thank you for organising this meeting, I thought it was fantastic. I’m very happy indeed at the prospect of new SEN schools.” *********************** “I am happy to be involved in any sort of ‘steering’ group with this as think my experience with XXX could contribute to the residential side of what they want to do. Following a post-meeting chat with Ivan, I don’t think they have any idea of what is involved in a practical level – but most importantly, I do think they have the will to get it done.” ***********************

Free Schools debates - SFV notes draft rwr – all data - 190616