Inquiry into post Special Educational Need (SEN) Provision in education, employment and training for those with Learning Disabilities in Northern Ireland (NIA 306/11-16)

inquiry-into-post-special-educational-need-sen-provision-in-education-employment-and-training-for-those-with-learning-disabilities-in-northern-ireland.pdf (1.44 mb)

Executive Summary

 1.The Committee for Employment and Learning agreed to conduct this Inquiry to address the concerns raised by the Committee and by advocates for those individuals with learning disabilities and their families, that once they leave full time education, where they have had long-term support, they find themselves with very little help or options for what they do next. 

2. The Committee critically examined post School provision in Northern Ireland, including consideration of the current policies, programmes and opportunities available in Northern Ireland, for those with learning disabilities leaving education. The Committee also looked at issues raised regarding the transition planning process.

3. The Committee acknowledged that this was a complex area of policy involving an array of integrated service provision across a range of Government Departments.  The Committee looked at international best practice as well as examples of local good practice within Northern Ireland.  In carrying out this extensive Inquiry, the Committee has listened to heartfelt pleas from parents and carers for better services and provisions for their young people. The Committee has also heard from Departments about the efforts they are engaged in to support those people with learning disabilities when they leave school.

4. The Committee would like to thank all those individuals and organisations that took the time to engage with the Committee, the organisations that opened the doors of their schools and facilities to assist our work and the individuals who told us of their personal experiences of the system.

5. The Committee categorised the evidence it received into a number of distinct areas of concern.  These areas of concern are briefly described below and a list of the Committees recommendations to the relevant government Departments are also included.  The Committee believes that if these recommendations are accepted and acted upon across government, they will have the effect of creating a system which meets the needs of those who rely on it.

The Transition Process

6. With regard to the transitions process, the evidence showed that there were two conflicting views. Firstly, that there is no real issue with the actual transition process but that the problem lies with the lack of suitable provision for individuals to transition to. Secondly, that there are problems within the process which hamper a smooth transition such as lack of information sharing.

The Scope of FE

7. The evidence showed the vital and central position of Further Education and vocational training in the plans of people with learning disabilities, and their families when they are approaching the end of their time in school. However, despite this crucial role, a majority of the evidence provided to the Committee highlights that access to appropriate educational courses is inadequate to meet need and that there is a structural problem at the heart of the provision. A specific problem being that Further Education cannot be considered the solution for everyone with a learning disability yet there is a lack of alternative provision.

A Person Centred Approach

8. A range of the evidence received by the Committee emphasised the importance of ensuring that there is a person centred approach to Post SEN services and that the provision offered meets each individual’s needs. The need to provide an individualised service for the most vulnerable in our society remains an absolute priority for any modernised or reforming day service.

Progression

9. Another important issue highlighted in the evidence was the need for proper progression for learners in post school provision. The aim should be that the levels of provision are appropriate for the individual as he or she develops.

Coordination

10. One of the overarching concerns relayed to the Committee during the Inquiry was the lack of coordination across government. Although there are many cross departmental strategies and action plans aiming for better coordination and although there are localised examples of good practice in cross departmental working in providing services for those with learning disabilities, the criticisms remain that communication and service provision across Departments is inadequate.

Social Inclusion

11. The evidence suggested that more can and should be done within the community setting to support those with learning disabilities. 

Transport

12. A major obstacle for Post 19 Provision has been the availability, or otherwise, of transport for getting those with learning disabilities to post 19 provision. The lack of viable transport options, particularly in rural areas, adds another significant barrier to accessing services. The view has been widely expressed, not just from the evidence received by the Committee but from a succession of Departmental reports and academic studies, that there is a need for accessible, safe and supported transport for young people who are not yet independent.

Demand

13. The evidence to the Committee would suggest that demand for FE provision is not currently being fully met and submissions refer to the number of individuals with learning disabilities that end up not in employment, education or training.  There is also evidence that this will increase in the coming years.  

Information

14. The need for high quality information spans three main issues. Firstly, better and more accessible information to ensure that individuals with Learning Disabilities and their parents and carers can make correct choices about their future. Secondly, the need to track the progression of individuals leaving school and thirdly that there needs to be systematic data collection to assist in the monitoring and evaluation of projects and programmes and to help identify service needs as individuals move into the transition process.

Good Practice

15. A number of submissions and oral evidence highlighted models of good practice across different training providers, colleges and some of the health trusts, although it was acknowledged by some that good practice was not uniformly evident across Northern Ireland. The evidence pointed out that approaches need to be fully assessed, lessons learned, models of good practice highlighted and strategically rolled out. Due to the competitive nature of funding there is no systemic sharing of best practice.

Work Experience

16. Some of the evidence heard by the Committee focused on the importance of work experience and concerns over the lack of provision. The evidence highlighted that work experience provision is inconsistent and usually arranged on an informal basis through family members. The evidence also suggested that there appears to be a need for more opportunities for young people to access work experience while at school in order to increase their potential to progress to paid employment at a later stage.

Opportunities to work

17. Statistics from Mencap detailed that young people with a learning disability are twice as likely to be NEET as those without a learning disability and that only 17% of people with a learning disability are in any form of paid work, compared to 46% of disabled people and 80% of the general population. Even where people with a learning disability do work, it is often for low pay and for part-time hours. Too often, the work carried out by people with a learning disability is described as ‘work experience’ and does not lead to real pay or a real job.

Day Services for People with Complex Care Needs

18. The evidence indicated that there is also a worry that day centres are ill equipped. Some parents during the evidence sessions raised concerns that, as currently structured, day-care will lead to children’s learning beginning to regress. There was a view that day-care was not sufficiently focused on lifelong learning, and that it was a sedentary environment. There was a worry that advances in the school setting, even if only basic communication for individuals with severe learning disabilities would be lost in a day-care centre.

Support

19. Some evidence emphasised that all post-school providers need to ensure that they can fully meet the needs of their students or trainees pupils by having appropriate measures in place in terms of pre-entry support to include travel training, staff expertise including additional support staff, facilities and equipment and also to help with any problems that occur regarding bullying or behavioural issues.

Legislation

20. At the outset of its Inquiry the Committee agreed that it was willing to bring forward legislation if it was deemed necessary to improve the post school provision for those with learning disabilities. The Committee looked at options around increasing the statement of educational need to age 25, the increased use of social clauses to increase opportunities and for the need for a Champion or Commissioner for those with learning disabilities.

Funding

21. A number of organisations pointed out that places are limited and groups emphasised that, due to their reliance on ESF grants, they are concerned about continued provision.

Benefits

22. The evidence highlighted that there is a concern for people looking to access placement and volunteering opportunities as there is a worry that this will impact upon much relied upon social security support and that this leads to a reluctance to participate in volunteering opportunities for short periods.