Birmingham counts £18m cost of helping special needs pupils
Figures produced by the council predict that the number of SEN pupils will reach 41,000 by 2021, up from almost 37,000 today. However, the proportion of pupils with statements is forecast to remain broadly the same.
Only pupils with statements can attend the city’s special schools, therefore the prediction suggests that most of the additional 4,000 SEN children by 2021 will have to go to mainstream schools.
The question of how children with the most challenging needs should be educated is at the centre of attempts to agree a new SEN strategy. A draft version suggests that mainstream schools will be able to cope, but only with new investment in buildings, teaching staff and carers.
The first draft proposed that many children with behavioural, emotional and social difficulties (BESD) could be educated in mainstream schools with appropriate help and supervision. The document stated: “Occasionally mainstream schools might refer a child to special provision if there is a dramatic change in their needs, but this would only occur if other routes were unsuitable and it would require statutory assessment.”
The likelihood of significant new money seems remote given the local authority’s acute financial problems. The children, young people and families directorate has to cut £31.5 million from its budget over the next four years as a contribution to a council-wide cuts package of £325 million.
One money-saving proposal is to trim Birmingham’s generous home to school transport system, which costs £17 million a year to operate. Proposals before the cabinet would restrict free transport to SEN pupils attending “the nearest appropriate school”, forcing the parents of those who travel across the city to school to pay for the journey.
It’s also proposed to cut £4.4 million from specialist help from voluntary sector funding for disabled children, home start and intensive family support.
Cllr Ward added: “We need a new approach to the SEN issue, but I do not want to see a cost cutting exercise disguised as a new strategy.”
