Top tips for writing a SEND and Alternative Provision (AP) Self-Evaluation Framework
Creating your self-evaluation framework (SEF) is an opportunity for shifting culture, raising the profile of children and young people with special educational needs whilst creating the chance for honest conversations and reflections about future actions. Top tips here include: three key questions to address, context and detail for creating SEF and an example of Annual SEF Planning Cycle.
With thanks to South West SEND Colleagues and Barbara Peacock for creating this guidance.
Background
The CQC/Ofsted Area Special Educational Needs and Disabilities and Alternative Provision(SEND/AP) Inspection Framework places a self-evaluation document, often referred to as a SEF, in a more central position. A SEF will be requested prior to an Area SEND/AP inspection. The SEF will also be used during the annual engagement meeting with CQC and Ofsted and it will also be used in any subsequent monitoring visits.
The SEF is an evaluation of your local area SEND/AP partnership and the impact this has on the outcomes for children and young people with SEND and those in alternative provision in your area. It is not a SEF of the local authority children’s services.
There is no prescribed format for a SEF, except that it should be a stand-alone document which is both concise and current.
Creating your SEF is an opportunity for shifting culture, raising the profile of children and young people with special educational needs whilst creating the chance for honest conversations and reflections about future actions.
Three key questions to address in a SEF as outlined in the Ofsted SEND/AP Handbook
What do you know about the impact of your arrangements for children and young people with SEND and those in Alternative Provision?
How do you know what impact your arrangements for children and young people with SEND are having?
What are your plans for the next 12 months to improve the experiences and outcomes for children and young people with SEND?
A SEF is not a static document; it needs to be reviewed and updated. Think about how this is done. Does it fit into an agreed cycle for review? How is the SEND2 data used? Is there a process to update if there has been significant changes or significant movement in outcomes for children and young people? Is there a governance route for sign off or to update progress?
Who ‘owns’ the SEF and is its ‘champion’? This is a SEF of your local area SEND/AP partnership so should be ‘owned’ by the partnership. Do you have clear governance arrangements across the Local Area Partnership with a SEND Board? Does the Board ‘own’ the SEF? Do differences get aired and responded to and reflected in the SEF?
How are parents/cares and the voices of children and young people involved at the strategic level? How do you as systems leaders understand and hear about the lived experiences of children, young people and their families/carers? How are they shaping the SEF?
How is your Lead Member for Children’s Services involved? Do they know, understand and agree with what is in the SEF?
Who knows about your SEF? Is a version of it on your Local Offer website? Have you got an easy read version of your SEF?
What would key partners, education leaders or children and families say about the content of the SEF?
Co-produce the content– the process of co-production is as important as the end result. It shapes your ambition as a Local Area Partnership and/or reenforces your ambition. Some areas have workshops or surveys to help gather a wide range of views to inform the self-evaluation. Through this process priorities for action over the next 12 months become clearer.
Be clear how any SEND/AP strategy interfaces with the SEF. Are there other strategic documents covering SEND such as an Autism Strategy or Safety Valve Agreement? Keep the ‘golden thread’ of your local narrative running through all your strategy documents and SEF with a join up of priorities and actions. Strategy documents, actions and milestones, evaluation documents – should all join up.
The document should stand aloneand be concise– but you can hyperlink to other documents where you want to provide the reader with an opportunity to access more detail. If it is too long, it will not be read widely and it will be very challenging to keep up to date. Always have a clear summary & if possible an easy read version.
Use plain language, avoid abbreviations and consider using tables or bullet pointsto help present your information with greater clarity.
Keep the introduction / context sections to a minimum – what are the most important things that need to be communicated about your area? What is unique to your local area? Are there other documents that can provide more detail/ context? This is not the place to give an account of all your services.
Avoid descriptions of services and provision – the focus should be on evaluation – judgement - evidence - impact- next steps. The purpose of the SEF is a summary of what the area does well, the impact on children and their families, what needs to be improved, how will you know the impact of your actions/intentions and what you will do next? Keep thinking Local Area Partnership. Worked examples in appendix 1.
Think about any previous inspections- what were the actions and what was noted that you did well? Depending on how recently the inspection was you may wish to include them as part of your evidence.
Remain curious about the lived experiences of children, young people and their families. Ensure they are visible, valued & included in your communities, with their outcomes and ambitions reflected in the SEF.
Cover all eleven of the evaluation themes that make up the CQC/Ofsted SEND/AP inspection framework. Ensure all aspects are covered for children with SEN support needs, those with EHC plans and those attending alternative provision. This includes children and young people from 0 to 25 years.
Be clear how, as a local area system, you are going to address any areas you are wanting to improve in the next 12 months. Bring a clear sense of prioritisation to your planned actions. This will help you to ensure your SEND and AP Improvement plan for the next 12 months is achievable.
SW SEND Example of Annual SEF Planning Cycle
Annual cycle of SEF coproduction tasks
Suggested month
Starting out:
Identify who your SEND SEF partners are (Health, Education including school settings (mainstream and special), Care, SENDIAS and PCF). You may wish to have a memorandum of understanding setting out how you will work together on the SEF.
Make contact and agree how work will be collated and signed off across the year.
Book in quarterly agenda items on Local Area Partnership Board meetings and link this work to pre-inspection preparation.
Where necessary plan update meetings to keep conversations live and to prevent any gaps in local area knowledge (especially when there are changes in key staff).
Create a TEAMS and Share Point site with processes for updates and notes.
Use a template to collate local area partnership feedback and consider using a RAG (Red, Amber, Green) system.
Meeting agendas can focus on those actions showing red.
Before you start the SEF cycle make sure you have key elements in place.
SEF signed off by SEND partnership/ DCS/ ICB.
September
Submit signed off SEF to RIIA for the next Regional Collaboration Peer Challenge (RCPC).
September
Regional Collaboration Peer Challenge (RCPC) takes place. Local area partnerships present their SEF to other local areas for support and challenge.
October
Re work SEF using RCPC feedback.
November
Discuss and review at SEND Partnership Board and with key partners. Identify those actions showing RED on plan.
December
Discuss and a 6-month review at SEND partnership Board.
January
Form any working groups needed to move any stuck actions forwards.
February
SW RIIA SEF Writers event.
March
Review SEN 2 data with Local Area Partnership Board.
June
Review SEF progress and collate feedback on progress.
July
Rewrite SEF ready for September sign off.
August
Judgement
Evidence
Impact
Next steps
All commissioned services evidence how they support children and young people to make effective transitions (judgement). This has meant all Year 11s in the Hospital Education Reintegration Service (HERS) (evidence) have been offered career advice and have a plan in place for September (impact). Plans are in place to ensure this is continued into the next academic year (next steps).
We have improved significantly, and we are now in line with the national position in the percentage of the child population that are identified with special educational needs at SEN support (SG is 12.7 per cent, national is 13.3 per cent) and the percentage of children and young people who have an EHC Plan (SG is 4.7 per cent, national is 4.7 per cent) (judgement). The position of our schools judged to be either Good or Outstanding by Ofsted has increased significantly (impact) with 95 per cent primary; 93 per cent secondary and 83 per cent special/AP judged to be either Good or Outstanding at the end of the 2023/2024 academic year. The 17 per cent of special schools not Good or Outstanding relates to one school, Academy which is currently Requires Improvement (RI) and this is the second time the school has been judged RI (evidence). Consequently, the local authority is working closely with the Multi Academy Trust to support the school to turn the position around (next steps).
In relation to local mainstream schools, inspectors regularly highlight strengths in SEND provision across all schools and overall (evidence), this results in education outcomes that are good (judgement). However, there is work to do to improve the arrangements in meeting the needs of pupils with social, emotional and mental health needs (next steps); too many of whom are referred for EHC needs assessments in secondary education and outcomes for SEN Support at secondary (judgement) are below national (evidence). We also have a higher percentage of children with EHC Plans than national indicating that we need to improve the identification of need in this area (impact).
The current SEND governance arrangements are not effective (judgement); this has meant that the priorities set by the SEND Partnership Board have not been delivered (impact). While there is an established SEND Partnership Board, with commitment from all key partners, members have identified that its operation and the area's strategy need to be refreshed to enable it to provide effective governance (evidence). Next steps are to refresh the terms of reference and practice of the SEND Partnership Board (next steps).
The Local Authority and its partners provide a broad range of services that provide good support to children and their families in their early years (judgement) enabling children to make a good start in life (impact). Service user feedback indicates high levels of satisfaction with children's centres and early years services (x per cent); parents say "give examples" and the proportion of children achieving a GLD in reception is above national averages at x per cent (LGA) (evidence). The next step is to maintain this progress through their reception year (next steps).
