As local councils face increasing demand for special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) services alongside growing financial deficits, could the implementation of locality clusters provide some relief?
The funding framework is currently under review as part of government reforms aimed at revamping the special needs system. But what exactly does it entail, and what are its potential advantages and disadvantages? Schools Week delves into the details…
Experts estimate that around 15 local authorities have embraced the “locality cluster” model for SEND funding, also known as community funding or mainstream inclusion partnerships.
Nottinghamshire has operated a variant of this model since the 1980s, while other areas, such as Kent, began using it only recently. Interest in this approach seems to be on the rise.
This model transitions high-needs funding from a ‘pupil-led’ system—where funding access is primarily dependent on a child having an education, health and care plan (EHCP)—to a ‘school-led’ model.
Under locality clusters, schools are grouped and provided with a shared funding allocation from their local authority’s high-needs budget, allowing school leaders to determine its expenditure.
Although practices can vary, clusters usually involve groups of eight to ten schools across different educational phases.
In Nottinghamshire, these clusters manage 18 percent of the high-needs block, contrasted with Hounslow, which initiated clusters in 2023 and handles around 1 percent.
Funding levels typically depend on metrics such as student demographics and socio-economic conditions. Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCos) can apply for funding through their clusters with parental approval.
These SENCos convene regularly—usually at least once a term—to collectively decide on funding distributions.
Dr. Peter Gray, a SEND policy consultant who assists local authorities with implementing this model, described it as “far more dynamic and flexible,” facilitating quicker access to SEND support compared to the EHCP process.
While EHCP decisions are supposed to be finalized within 20 weeks, data indicates that last year, 46 percent exceeded this timeframe, with a segment taking over a year.
Students are not required to have an EHCP to receive funding through clusters.
SENCos can apply for funding promptly at the next scheduled meeting, bypassing lengthy statutory processes.
Additionally, Dr. Gray noted that this model can mitigate cost pressures associated with EHCPs. If a child receives an EHCP early, “the school is incentivized to retain the resources once allocated.”
The cluster model enables access to short-term funding “to help navigate a significant need,” he elaborated.
Jo-Anne Sanders, service director for learning and early support at Kirklees Council, remarked that cluster meetings foster collaboration between primary and secondary institutions, enabling them to “learn from one another.”
Daniel Beck, strategic lead for SEND at Southampton Council, shared an example where a secondary school procured funding for Lexilenses reading aids to benefit both itself and its associated primary schools. This preparation ensured that pupils entering the secondary school were already accustomed to using these aids.
Reducing EHCPs?
In England, one in every 20 children has an EHCP, and one in five is recognized with special needs. The rising demand is leading to significant deficits for local councils.
South Gloucestershire Council began utilizing a cluster model in 2020-21. At that time, 3.5 percent of pupils had EHCPs compared to a national average of 3.1 percent, while SEN support levels were lower than average.
A recent report from the council indicated that local SEND leaders feel the clusters “have promoted greater understanding, improved identification, and fostered collective responsibility for children with SEND.”
Though the number of EHCPs continues to grow, it has increased at a slower rate compared to regional or national figures, especially in primary schools where the clusters are “more firmly established.” Additionally, SEN support figures have risen, reducing the disparity with national rates.
Hounslow Council implemented its mainstream inclusion partnership (MIP) in April 2023, aiming to alleviate its SEND deficit under a safety valve agreement.
Lyn Gray, head of service for standards, practice, and partnerships, stated that the council frequently evaluates whether to increase investment in this mainstream inclusion model.
Cluster funding should not impede access to EHCPs
Reducing reliance on EHCPs “is an ideal outcome,” she added, while recognizing that “some children genuinely require that pathway” and that the cluster model is “not an outright substitute at this stage.” The goal is “to assist children needing early intervention.”
Despite Nottinghamshire County Council leading the way with the cluster model, its requests for EHCPs surged by over 150 percent, reaching 1,719 in five years up to 2024. This growth contrasts with an overall rise of 87 percent across England.
However, it still maintains “one of the lowest numbers of EHCPs in the country,” as noted by Orlaith Green, head of psychology and inclusion services, allowing children to access funding without needing an EHCP.
In certain local authorities, schools are now expected to pursue cluster funding prior to considering EHCP referrals.
Abigail Hawkins, a former SENCo now operating a support service called Sensible SENCo, remarked that cluster funding should facilitate early intervention and not be used as a hurdle for securing an EHCP.
Supporting Groups of Students
Clusters so often prioritize initiatives that benefit multiple students rather than individual cases.
In Southampton, around 86 percent of requests processed through the model are “project-based” or for group interventions, with only 14 percent for individual needs. In Kent, the scheme is limited strictly to whole-school initiatives.
Debbie Kelly, a former headteacher who played a key role in establishing Kirklees’ cluster model, explained that her cluster initially emphasized funding professional development for staff, to empower more individuals to benefit a broader cohort of students.
In Hounslow, about 60 percent of funding applications target group initiatives, such as enhanced speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, learning mentor support, and the establishment of “nurture spaces.”
Lyn Gray praised the transition “away from focusing solely on individuals.” However, she noted that this strategy may be more suitable for primary settings, as pulling children from classes for group work in secondary schools poses challenges due to scheduling conflicts.
Hounslow SENCo Georgie Venn-Coffey shared that her school successfully acquired funding for a teaching assistant dedicated to assisting Year 2 students facing reading difficulties, which “has proven to be very effective.”
Another institution utilized funding to train a therapy dog, while a secondary school in Chiswick secured support to create a sensory room.
Concerns About Responsibility
Critics of the model have raised concerns. One trust CEO, in a correspondence to Kent County Council, argued that funding requests for individual students are “far less likely to succeed,” resulting in increased competition among schools for limited resources.
A Kent SENCo, who requested anonymity, expressed that the model seems “like an attempt to address a funding crisis without genuinely increasing financial investment.”
“The local authority is shifting its responsibility onto schools,” they contended.
In response, Kent County Council asserted that the model “has significantly minimized bureaucracy and administrative overhead for both schools and the local authority, allowing staff to concentrate on delivering services that are most needed.”
The council maintained that this system empowers school leaders to make financial decisions rather than relying solely on KCC officers. They emphasized the necessity for this decision-making to be efficiently managed and properly documented, ensuring transparency and accountability in public fund usage.
Although acknowledging the complexities involved with implementing cluster funding, the council affirmed its goal of enabling more timely responses to students’ needs and enhancing SEND support while maintaining budgetary constraints and changing distribution methods.
Professional Growth
In regions with established cluster models, SENCos have reported valuing the framework.
Orlaith Green noted that SENCos appreciate the chance to “exchange practices” and “collaborate on problem-solving.”
A survey among Hounslow SENCos revealed that 72 percent stated that discussions during cluster meetings influenced their professional practices.
Meg Jones, headteacher at Kingsgate Primary School in Camden, commented that the model has “transformed” local support for children with SEND.
“By allowing SENCos to directly apply to a peer panel, we’ve diminished delays and have been able to respond more swiftly and effectively without relying exclusively on the EHCP framework,” she stated.
SENCos now feel empowered and trusted, resulting in families benefitting from timely and coordinated support.
In Kirklees, an anonymous feedback survey taken after the cluster model’s inaugural year indicated that 90 percent of SENCos endorsed it.
Dr. Gray remarked that SENCos “don’t merely advocate for their own institutions. They recognize that certain children have heightened needs at various times, leading to a shared local responsibility for addressing needs across the wider community.”
Need for Consistency
However, without national legislation or guidelines, achieving uniformity in decisions remains challenging.
The Kent SENCo shared, “I can submit two applications of equal merit, yet one might be accepted for review while the other is denied.”
Hawkins cautioned that the framework might “pit SENCos against one another,” with individual relationships sometimes overshadowing decision outcomes.
Green concurred that any “deterioration in relationships” between SENCos influences the consistency of funding determinations.
To counter this, some local authorities have implemented quality assurance measures like annual evaluations or appointing cluster leads to oversee decision-making and assist with applications.
Nonetheless, Hawkins argued that the model necessitates “definition” and “consistency” across local authorities, emphasizing the need for clarity on “its relationship with all layers of funding.”
Green agreed that establishing a “consistent national approach” would be beneficial, especially for SENCos functioning across various local systems.
Call for Accountability
Benedicte Yue, chief financial officer at River Learning Trust, stressed the importance of having “some accountability measures” in place.
“When you allocate funding, there needs to be accountability,” she specified, advocating for reporting mechanisms to monitor cluster operations.
An Ofsted area SEND inspection in October acknowledged Hounslow’s MIP as “successful” and noted it has enhanced children’s experiences through better communication between educational institutions and services.
However, inspectors observed that the local area “lacks strong oversight regarding how effectively education providers utilize their assigned funding.”
Yue believes in the necessity of creating an “intermediary mechanism” to diminish “variability between clusters” and provide “quality assurance.”
Dr. Gray expressed hope for establishing “regional communities of practices,” allowing local authorities to collaboratively implement cluster funding and provide “constructive peer support and feedback.”
The government is reportedly considering the cluster model as it prepares to introduce SEND reforms this term.
According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the government currently allocates around £12 billion for high-needs funding; however, Department for Education data suggests merely £2.4 billion was distributed to schools in SEN funding during 2023-24.
An estimated £2 billion is allocated for SEND transport, along with approximately £1.8 billion for placing children in independent SEND schools, despite only five percent of pupils with EHCPs attending these institutions.
“At present, the entire high-needs block is heavily saturated and firmly tied to the statutory requirements for EHCPs,” Yue indicated. “No funding remains for preventive measures.”
The concept behind the cluster model is to decrease investment in EHCPs, as the individual funding approach has proven inadequate given the increase in complex needs.
‘We could be maximizing value’
Sanders, representing Kirklees Council, mentioned they currently support 230 children costing approximately £30 million in private SEND arrangements.
“If we can decrease that number by enhancing capacity and skills within our state-funded sector, we are ensuring better value for our resources,” she concluded.
The council also gained the “confidence of parents and caregivers” by involving parent forums in the model’s development process.
Dr. Gray pointed out that, given the ongoing rise in deficits among authorities without intervention, the anticipation is that allocating funding through clusters will eventually mitigate other expenditures over time.
This strategy does not intend to abolish the statutory framework but to “reduce the necessity for that model as confidence in alternatives increases.” He further noted, “It’s not a flawless approach; it’s an evolving one, yet it holds the most promise for addressing the current challenges we face.”
