BEST VALUE REVIEW: SERVICE SPECIFICATION

SPECIALIST TEACHER ADVISORY SERVICE : 12 MAY 2000

Project title : Best value review of specialist teacher advisory service for sensory impaired and physically disabled children

Review Project Manager: Cliff Turner, Assessment & Intervention Manager (Principal Educational Psychologist)

Departmental Lead Officer for Best Value: Nigel Hill

1. Aims of the Service and Statutory basis

We aim to provide leadership to the educational community of Hampshire. We will all make sure that we help to create the conditions in which self managing schools can flourish and achieve the highest possible standards for all their pupils. The vision is to create an environment in which everyone involved in education in Hampshire is working together to promote and sustain good teaching and learning.

To make appropriate education for all children regardless of disability is a tenet of the Union Nations Charter on the Rights of the Child.

The need to ensure that all children regardless of their impairments or disabilities is enshrined in the recent Disability Discrimination Act.

Under Section 162 of the Education Act 1993, LEAs may provide special educational needs support services to schools. Hampshire County Council provides peripatetic specialist teachers of the visually impaired and blind (VI), hearing impaired and deaf (HI) and physically disabled (PD). National regulations require mandatory training for HI and VI teachers, over and above minimal teaching qualifications. This usually involves a two year part time course at post graduate level. There is no such requirement at present for PD teachers.

There is a statutory duty under the Education Act, 1986 to ensure that a core service is delivered to pupils statemented for HI, VI or PD.

In Hampshire most children with sensory impairments and physical disabilities attend mainstream schools. Those with more severe difficulties may attend specially resourced mainstream schools. In exceptional cases a child may attend a special school. Hampshire only maintains one special school designated for children with these difficulties: Saxon Wood which is a primary school for children with physical difficulties in Basingstoke. Hampshire maintains one secondary school for children with visual impairments; Toynbee in Eastleigh. Those children who are deemed to require education in a special school therefore attend non-maintained special schools, most of which are residential, or special schools maintained by neighbouring authorities.

2. Objectives of the Service

· To contribute to the assessment of children with sensory impairments and physical disabilities

· To liaise with other professionals so that officers and families gain a comprehensive view of children's needs.

· To work with teachers to plan individual teaching programmes

· To provide advice and guidance to schools, parents/carers, LEA officers and other agencies regarding the education of children with sensory and physical disabilities

· To teach individual pupils as required

· To represent the needs of pupils and parents to officers of the LEA

3. Links to corporate aims

The Specialist Teacher Advisory Service (STAS) is relevant to developing the quality of life in Hampshire for those families who have a child with a sensory impairment or physical disability. Such a diagnosis often represents a tragedy for the family. The STAS helps the family to adjust to the situation and seeks to maximise the educational opportunities for the child.

The STAS also works to promote involvement, participation and partnership to achieve the development of strong communities in Hampshire. Its emphasis on educating children with sensory impairments or physical disabilities within the local community wherever possible is core to this aim. More specifically the STAS works in co-operation with minority communities such as the deaf community.

The STAS is committed to providing high quality services to the public through well trained and motivated staff.

4. Other links

As part of the Education Department STAS is subject to the principles of promoting school effectiveness, professional leadership, partnership and quality of service as set out in the Education Development Plan 1999-2002. The approach to resource allocation within STAS reflects the "distribution according to need" principle adopted by other Education Department services.

The Hampshire County Council Special Educational Needs Policy (1995) sets out overall aims for children:

· To maintain and improve quality of provision

· To promote greater inclusion in mainstream education

· To establish effective assessment systems

· To ensure equitable distribution of resources

· To work in partnership with parents and other stakeholders

The Service links directly with the SEN Development Plan that is in the process of being revised in the light of recent changes and initiatives.

The Service is important within the context of the Inclusion Plan, about which formal consultation is expected soon.

The Service links with the Early Years Development and Childcare Plan as it is part of the range of services supporting families of young children - particularly at a pre-school level. Within this overall plan there is an Early Years SEN Strategic Plan, which makes specific reference to the role of the Service in supporting families.

The Service is also relevant to the Joint Children's Service Plans as it aims to provide for children in need under the terms of the Children Act, 1989.

There is a link with the Health Improvement Plans where such Plans have identified children with disabilities as a priority.

Individuals with difficulties such as hearing impairment are at risk of developing behaviour difficulties in childhood and mental health problems in adolescence. There is a consequent link with the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Plans and the Behaviour Support Plan.

5. Service Policies

Each of the three professional sections within the STAS (i.e. HI, VI and PD) has its own manual of policies and procedures. Each document consists of a large level arch file. There is a lot of consistency between the three policy files. The differences reflect the nature of the children's needs and national guidance from professional associations, and the relative sizes of the three professional sections. As an example, the contents of the PD file is attached in Appendix 1.

6. Summary of existing service and delivery methods

Each teacher advisor has her or his own caseload and is responsible for responding to needs within a defined geographical area of the county. Criteria exist to prioritise referrals, and the frequency and nature of ongoing support. Within mainstream schools, generally, the more profound a child's difficulties, the more often he or she will be visited. Some children may get a visit every week. Other children may perhaps only be visited once a year. In all around 7000 visits are made per year.

Several members of the VI section are involved in direct teaching of individual children on weekly basis. Direct teaching is rarely undertaken by the HI section, and not at all by the PD teacher advisors. The role of these two sections of the STAS is almost exclusively advisory.

Each teacher advisor works across the whole age range from diagnosis (which can be soon after birth) to 19 years. The STAS is not established to work in colleges. (Some support is provided to colleges on a purchased basis, but this amounts to a very small level of activity).

Good practice indicates that it is important to get involved early in a child's education, because that is when intervention is most effective. It is also helpful to intervene early in order to minimise the need for statementing (which is a time consuming and potentially stigmatising process). Continuity of support and consistency of service delivery are important for both statemented and non-statemented pupils. Further details about ways of working are given in Appendix 2. (This is an old document, but still represents current practice).

In 1993, the STAS became part of Child and Parent Services and was managed by the SEN Inspectors. Following changes to the Education Department structure, in April 1999 management of the STAS transferred to the Inclusion Branch. The STAS is based in the three local education offices and Bartley. Professional leadership is provided by a senior practitioner for the HI section, based in Fleet, and for the VI section based in Winchester. There is no equivalent post within the PD section. Throughout the Service there is a clear commitment to a collegiate approach to development. This is reflected in current arrangements for performance review, which have been introduced in advance of government guidance.

In common with other staff involved in the assessment of individual children with special needs, the STAS is managed by the Assessment and Intervention Manager (Principal Educational Psychologist). There are three Assistant Principal Educational Psychologists, one in each of the three local offices. Although highly skilled in their own professional area, the educational psychologists do not have the same technical expertise and specific qualifications as the teacher advisors.

The last review of provision for children with physical disabilities was in 1989 as part of the "All our Children" exercise. The last review of provision for children with sensory impairments reported in 1994. Based on a thorough needs analysis, the 1994 sensory review recommended a modest increase in staffing for the HI section and a 250% increase for the VI section.

Taking the 1997 local government re-organisation into account, the relative size of the HI section of the STAS has in fact increased slightly. The size of the VI section has increased too, but not to the extent recommended in the 1994 review.

Despite the recommendations of the 1989 review, the size of the PD section has reduced in the last ten years.

7. Costs of the Service

From September 2000 there will be 18.8 fte teaching staff in the STAS and 5.86 fte support officers. Approximately half of the Service consists of part time staff. All but two are female. Details of staffing are listed in Appendix 3.

From September there will be 9.8 HI teachers, 6 VI teachers (two of whom are unqualified), and 3 PD teachers.

Within the current financial year the delegated budget for this Service is £804,300. More details are given in Appendix 4.

In addition, the STAS administers an annual budget of £146,000 which is for specialist equipment used by individual children in Hampshire schools.

8. Recent Consultation

The STAS itself has undertaken a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis that is appended to this report (see Appendix 5).

The Service prides itself on being well skilled, highly committed and very flexible.

There is concern within the Service about high workload, low morale, recruitment difficulties, role confusion, the need for greater specialisation, and poor career structures.

All 570 headteachers have recently been invited to comment on the Service. (See note in Appendix 6). 28 replies were received, all of which were positive about the quality of the STAS. There was some concern over the limited amount of the service available. For example, there was a complaint about the fact that there has been a reduction in the staffing of the PD team within the last two years.

Within Inclusion Branch, Eric Smith is the lead officer for provision for sensory impaired and physically disabled children. He chairs three well established review groups; one for HI, one for VI and one for PD. These groups include representation from Health, Social Services and voluntary agencies. The three groups regularly discuss provision made by the LEA as a whole for children with sensory impairments and physical disabilities.

9. Performance data

Data kept by the STAS suggest that around 1500 children are visited on a regular basis each year.

For the past five years, the STAS has been collecting data on educational outcomes for HI pupils. (See Appendix 7). However, such data are not yet available for VI and PD pupils. Steps are being taken to ensure that relevant data for each disability area will be kept from now on.

10 Competition with other providers

National disability rights charities such as RNID, RNIB and Scope are well established. They provide support to parents, advice to schools and special education in schools that they maintain. (Their provision is usually segregated from pupils in mainstream schools and it is residential). LEA officers have worked hard to establish a positive partnership rather than competition with these organisations. In Hampshire it is exceptional therefore for one of the major disability rights charities to provide advocacy for parents against the LEA, particularly if there is an interest in attendance at one of their own schools.

There is a realisation that resourced mainstream schools and/or special schools could provide advisory teaching services on an outreach basis if they were staffed to do so. There is one example of this taking place. Again, rather than framing such activity as competition, officers prefer to encourage such developments in partnership with existing LEA services. Perhaps there could be more synergy between staff in resourced schools and the STAS.

Some neighbouring authorities could potentially provide peripatetic services into Hampshire. The reality is that none has sought to do so to date. On the other hand, Hampshire STAS has delivered services on a purchased basis into Portsmouth and Southampton since local government re-organisation in 1997. These contracts have now ceased as the current manager prefers to concentrate resources on Hampshire children rather than exploit potential new markets.

11. Current challenges facing the Service

· The need to match workload to staffing levels across the STAS.

· The need to clarify the role of the STAS in the context of the developing role of resourced mainstream schools for children with sensory impairments and physical disabilities.

· The need to clarify the role of the STAS in the context of the future role of special schools.

· The need to improve training, recruitment and retention.

· The need to continue to provide specialist advice across whole age range at a time when school based special educational needs co-ordinators are becoming better informed and skilled.

· The need to clarify the role of the STAS in relation to direct teaching as distinct from advisory work.

· The need to optimise management of STAS within Inclusion Branch.

· The need to improve the use of data in the strategic management of the Service.

BEST VALUE REVIEW : PROJECT BRIEF

SPECIALIST TEACHER ADVISORY

SERVICE : 12 MAY 2000

Project title: Best value review of specialist teacher advisory Service for sensory impaired and physically disabled children

Review Project Manager: Cliff Turner Assessment & Intervention Manager

1. Goal

The goal of the review is to use the Best Value framework to evaluate the current arrangements for supporting the education of children with sensory impairments and physical disabilities in Hampshire, with specific reference to the role of the Specialist Teacher Advisory Service (STAS).

2. Objectives

· To evaluate progress made since the last review of provision for sensory impairment and the last review of provision for physical impairment

· To clarify the needs of children with sensory and physical disabilities

· To clarify what is required to meet the needs of children with sensory and physical disabilities

· To research models of provision and support in similar LEAs

· To consult widely to identify a preferred pattern of provision across the county

· To link with other LEA policies and strategic plans

· To evaluate relationships between STA teams

· To evaluate relationships between STA teams and resourced provision

3. Approach

3.1 Introduction

A Best Value review group was established in January 2000 consisting of:

Anne Bamford Primary School Headteacher representative

Pete Greenwood Special School Headteacher representative

Gladys West Secondary School Headteacher representative

Chris Lloyd Inspector (Special Needs)

Barbara Gessler Specialist Senior Educational Psychologist

Paul Thomas Lead Teacher Adviser (Hearing Impairment)

Sue Simmonds Teacher Adviser (Physical Disability)

Cheryl Irons Lead Teacher Adviser (Visual Impairment)

Eric Smith Education Officer (Special Needs)

Norman Brown Teacher in Charge (Toynbee School, VI Resource)

Cliff Turner Assessment & Intervention Manager

Eric Smith as lead officer for provision in this area of work chairs three well established review groups; one for hearing impairment (HI), one for visual impairment (VI) and one for physical disabilities (PD). These groups include representation from Health, Social Services and voluntary agencies. Rather than set up a large unwieldy county review group, much of the detailed consultation will take place via these three groups.

Time line

26^th May Seminar for members

5^th June Further collection of benchmarking data

13^th June Submission of Scoping report

12^th July Scoping Panel

August Parent and Health professional consultations

September Pupil and school staff consultations

12^th October Submission of final report to Best Value Panel and Education Management Team

30^th October Discussion of final report to Education Management Team

3^rd November Presentation of final report to the STAS

17^th November Best Value Panel

3.2 Challenge

Challenge involves asking what the STAS is doing and why? Specifically,

What is the service being offered?

Why is the service being offered at all?

Why is the service being delivered by STAS rather than by another provider?

What are the outcomes?

What are the benefits?

The Best Value review group has sought to establish the demand for the services currently offered by the STAS:

· Numbers of children provided supported by the STAS per year

· Age in terms of national curriculum year, pre-school equivalent, or post 16 LEA maintained provision.

· Disability in terms of HI, VI or PD

· Intensity of need as measured by number of visits required per year as indicated by current criteria policies.

· Location (Education Area).

Separate data have been collected for statemented and non-statemented children. There is a statutory duty to deliver a core service to statemented pupils.

3.3 Consultation

A sample of headteachers will be selected for detailed consultation about future provision of services. In addition to headteachers, the following groups will be consulted:

· Special Educational Needs Co-ordinators (SENCO's) via a pyramid liaison meetings; one per education office area

· Staff in charge of mainstream schools resourced for sensory impairments and physical disabilities

· Class teachers (process to be arranged)

· Parents sensory impairments and physical disabilities (via survey)

· Disability rights charities e.g. RNIB (via review groups)

· Pupils (sample to be interviewed)

· Other professionals within the LEA e.g. educational psychologists (via questionnaire)

· Other professionals e.g. physiotherapists, (via questionnaire)

Most groups will be asked to rate their perceptions of service effectiveness on a five point scale in response to questions such as:

1. How satisfied are you with the frequency of visits children get?

2. It's important for teacher advisors to be technical experts in their

area of disability. How would you rate the expertise of the teacher advisors known to you?

3. It's important for teacher advisors to be understanding of the situations in which families find themselves. How understanding do you find your teacher advisor?

4. How satisfied are you with continuity of support?

5. How satisfied are you with the written feedback you get?

6. It's important that teacher advisers can integrate information from different agencies about your child. How well do you think this happens?

Specific groups will be asked questions of particular relevance to them. Consultation needs to establish how well the STAS is doing in terms of the Hampshire County Council SEN Policy (1995) which sets out overall aims for children.

· To maintain and improve quality of provision

· To promote greater inclusion in mainstream education

· To establish effective assessment systems

· To ensure equitable distribution of resources

· To work in partnership with parents and other stakeholders

3.4 Comparison

Comparison with other service providers will be in terms of levels of support and outcomes.

Comparison in terms of levels of support is difficult because even comparable counties make very different patterns of provision for their sensory impaired and physically disabled children. One authority may have invested heavily in resourced school provision. This will mean that there is less of a requirement for peripatetic support. Another authority may have implemented a policy that encouraged all children to attend their local mainstream school in which case the need for peripatetic support will be much greater. In Hampshire there is a mixed economy. Hampshire County Council maintains several resourced schools for HI, PD, (including one special school) and has one resourced school for VI.

Anecdotal comparison via professional networks suggests that the amount of designated provision made for VI pupils in Hampshire is low compared to other English counties (as we have small VI section of the STAS and only one resourced school). However, Hampshire is unusual in delegating a large proportion of its special needs funding to schools via the SEN Audit process.

For the past five years, the STAS has been collecting data on comparative educational outcomes for HI and deaf pupils (See attached documentation). However, such data are not yet available for VI and PD pupils. Steps are being taken to ensure that relevant data for each disability area as this is a LEA Ofsted requirement.

3.5 Competition

Competition involves finding out if the STAS represents good value for money and if there is a more effective way of delivering the services.

Agencies such as CIPFA, the Audit Commission and District Audit have been contacted already to solicit comparative costs. None has been able to supply information to date. The District Audit has advised that the data are simply not available.

Colleagues on the review group have also used their own professional networks to seek information about comparative costs from other comparable LEAs. This is proving time consuming and problematic. For example, within Hampshire we know the exact size of the delegated budget. However, our delegated budget does not include office accommodation, whereas in Surrey it does. Moreover, in Kent, the delegated budget does not include secretarial support because in that LEA such services a centrally provided, rather than delegated.

At this stage it is not known if there are any alternative potential providers interested in delivering peripatetic services within Hampshire. Consequently, it is not known what costs may be involved. Potentially competitors could include

Hampshire Resourced mainstream schools

Hampshire special schools

Neighbouring LEAs

Disability rights charities

Commercial consultancies

4. Scope

The scope of this review is indicated in the objectives and consultation process. Because of the relationship between the size of peripatetic advisory services and the amount of school based provision, the review group intends to expand the scope of the review to include school based provision. This will involve collecting data on:

· type, location, agreed place numbers and costs of resourced provision for HI, VI and PD;

· agreed place numbers and costs of Hampshire's PD school (Saxon Wood, Basingstoke), the VI resourced school (Toynbee, Eastleigh), and special schools used by Hampshire in Portsmouth and Southampton.

· total costs of support delegated to schools to provide for statemented pupils with HI, VI and PD by phase;

· total costs of support provided via the Hampshire special educational needs audit to HI, VI and PD pupils by phase;

· numbers and costs of out county placements by HI, VI and PD.

· Costs of transport in relation to attendance at the special school, resourced schools and out county schools

This review excludes support to children with HI, VI and PD provided by other education services e.g. educational psychology and education welfare. It does not include support to

Children with HI, VI and PD provided by other local authority services, e.g. social services, nor Health e.g. occupational therapy. Furthermore it does not include support provided by disability rights organisations such as RNIB, RNID and Scope.

5. Constraints

There is a high level of commitment to the Best Value process. However, time allocated to it by headteachers, teachers and officers is in competition with existing demands, many of which are both statutory and just as worthwhile.

6. Dependencies

It is recognised that information on comparative costs and provision from other LEAs would be helpful. Difficulties in obtaining comparative cost data have already been mentioned. Endeavours will continue to get comparable information, but inevitably the picture that emerges will be incomplete.

It is important that the three existing review groups are able to undertake effective consultation with other agencies and disability rights organisations.

Completion of the consultation process also depends on being able to recruit suitably skilled "neutral" interviewers to obtain pupil views about the services delivered by STAS. The Youth Service may be approached for this purpose.

7. Resource requirements

An average daily rate of £200 has been used for the following estimate:

Cliff Turner

Assessment & Intervention Manager

(Principal Educational Psychologist)

12.5.00