Management Information Sheet
SRB Review and Re-commissioning Project
Project briefing note
The recent Fair Funding consultation briefing events for schools made reference to the forthcoming review of Specialist Resource Bases (SRBs). The planning for this is underway but in the early stages. The following information outlines the context, scope and likely approach to the project.
Context and background
Performance monitoring of SRBs is the responsibility of the Additional Needs Strategy & Commissioning team. A Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting (MER) framework aligned to the approved Children’s Services framework for monitoring all internal and external contracts is being developed. The data obtained will inform future decisions on re-commissioning intentions.
Why is a review of the SRB programme needed now?
The above factors point to the need for a project of wider scope and scale than the routine performance monitoring and review of individual SRBs would provide. The whole rationale for SRBs and pattern of provision therefore needs to be reconsidered in the light of changes at national and local level which may render the existing model ineffective and/or inefficient.
Outline project timescale
Approach to the project
Options appraisal
Next steps
Amanda Mawbey
SEN Commissioner
2.10.12
The recent Fair Funding consultation briefing events for schools made reference to the forthcoming review of Specialist Resource Bases (SRBs). The planning for this is underway but in the early stages. The following information outlines the context, scope and likely approach to the project.
Context and background
There are currently 38 specialist resource bases (SRBs) operating across the county, offering intervention across 6 areas of special need: Behaviour (including Compass Centres), Learning and Cognition, Autistic Spectrum Disorder, speech language and communication, Dyslexia, Hearing Impairment. | |
46 revenue streams have been allocated to fund the above bases, with the exception of the two Deaf resource bases which are funded from the DSG. | |
The SRBs were established as part of the SEN strategy plan approved by Cabinet in 2008 and implemented between Sept 2009 and Sept 2012. Total revenue funding of approximately £4.5M p.a is currently top -sliced from the dedicated schools grant, as agreed with Schools Forum. | |
SRBs are hosted by mainstream schools, with the exception of the Compass Centre which is hosted by the Short Stay School for Norfolk | |
The first performance review of individual SRBs is due in spring/summer 2013. Any decisions to decommission existing provision will need to be taken by July 2013 in order to give a full academic year’s notice to terminate the contract by August 2014,in line with the service level agreement. |
Performance monitoring of SRBs is the responsibility of the Additional Needs Strategy & Commissioning team. A Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting (MER) framework aligned to the approved Children’s Services framework for monitoring all internal and external contracts is being developed. The data obtained will inform future decisions on re-commissioning intentions.
Why is a review of the SRB programme needed now?
National changes to school finance regulations from April 2013 mean that it will no longer be possible to fund SRBs in the current way. These are outlined in the current fair funding consultation; restrictions on how SEN places are identified and funded within these new regulations means that the current range of SRBs could create funding pressures in the future within the overall High Cost block. | |
An interim funding arrangement for SRBs has been proposed in the Fair Funding consultation which provides a ‘flat’ funding structure for all types of SRB’s of £100,000 per year for each 10 place SRB | |
Forthcoming SEN legislation will raise further issues, particularly with regard to personal budgets and enhanced parental choice impacting on the SRB model | |
Delegation of SEN monies to school and clusters from Sept 2012, along with increasing responsibility for determining SEN support locally, raises questions about the rationale for top-slicing school budgets for SRBs as a county-wide resource. | |
The new Ofsted framework puts a sharper focus on the performance of vulnerable groups. There is concern that some schools hosting SRBs, and the ‘home’ schools where pupils are on roll could struggle to demonstrate value-added for these pupils since SRBs do not own the pupil data and home schools can’t influence the teaching. Ofsted has just issued subsidiary guidance No.110166 which includes the inspection of mainstream schools with specially resourced provision for disabled pupils and those with SEN. It is strongly recommended that Heads and Governors of schools hosting SRBs, and all schools who have pupils who attend SRBs, familiarise themselves with paragraphs 151-160 of this guidance. http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/subsidiary-guidance-supporting-inspection-of-maintained-schools-and-academies-september-2012 | |
SRBs were originally set up to offer easily accessible early intervention without the need for a statement. This has proved difficult to achieve for a number of reasons including unequal geographic distribution, budget pressure on transport and pressure from mainstream schools for some SRBs to accept children with higher level needs than they were set up to cater for. | |
The academy programme is changing the nature of the relationship between schools and the LA, for example with regard to admissions decisions. | |
Children’s Services has limited resource available to monitor services commissioned on behalf of schools and this may reduce further in coming years. New ways of managing contracts need to be explored. |
The above factors point to the need for a project of wider scope and scale than the routine performance monitoring and review of individual SRBs would provide. The whole rationale for SRBs and pattern of provision therefore needs to be reconsidered in the light of changes at national and local level which may render the existing model ineffective and/or inefficient.
Outline project timescale
Sept- Nov 2012 project initiation work, finalise MER framework | |
Dec 2012/Jan 2013 data return and reports from SRBs | |
Jan – June 2013 stakeholder involvement, options generation and appraisal, preferred model decided | |
July 2012 decommissioning/ re-commissioning decisions and contract termination notices if needed | |
Sept 13- July 2014 transition planning, HR process where needed | |
Sept 2014 new model operational |
Approach to the project
A Project Initiation Document (business case) will be produced. This will determine the scale of the project and the size of team which needs to be set up to deliver the desired outputs | |
The project will be managed using NCC corporate project management guidance and documentation, scaled appropriately | |
Amanda Mawbey, SEN Commissioner, will lead the work, supported by Stuart Brunton-Douglas, Commissioning Support Officer within NCC Children’s Services’ Additional Needs Strategy & Commissioning team. |
Options appraisal
Options for change will be not be generated until the evidence base of outcomes/impact of SRBs is complete and stakeholder views have been obtained. However, the broad themes are likely to include status quo with a refreshed SLA, delegation of all SRB monies to schools/clusters and mixed models whereby some SRBs remain centrally commissioned on a remodelled basis and others close, with monies delegated to schools/clusters for local provision of services |
Next steps
A draft Project Initiation Document will be circulated in October, inviting expressions of interest from stakeholder groups to nominate members to join the project group | |
No changes to Service Level Agreements will be made while the SRB review is underway. However, if there are any further major changes locally or nationally which are likely to impact on SRBs, schools will be alerted via MI sheet. |
Amanda Mawbey
SEN Commissioner
2.10.12