Additional evidence from the Children’s Commissioner for Wales on Attendance and Behaviour
Goetre Primary School, Merthyr Tydfil fund their Family Education Support Worker through their Pupil Deprivation Grant monies.
head@goetre-jun.merthyr.sch.uk
http://www.raise-wales.org.uk/gellifaelog-brochure.pdf
Townhill Community School restorative practice work is part of a wider programme of work in Swansea wgich aims to be the first Restorative City in Wales and one of the first in the UK. The majority of funding for Restorative Practice is from Families First funding.
http://www.cypswansea.co.uk/index.cfm?articleid=40835
Case examples :
– Refusal of school to take a child with behavioural difficulties (Nov 2012)
14 year old moved back into area with mother major family disruptions causing a lot of emotional distress coupled with the fact that this yp has been diagnosed with ODD and ADHD. Mum attempted to get him back on the school role that he had previously attended – admission was denied as he had know behavioural difficulties. Child was given a place at a school that was not his catchment school this case also highlighted the confusion various professional have as to who makes referrals to CAMHS for assessments.
– Multi discip failure(July 2012)
YP out of education for 12 months. There had been behavioural issues in school and he had been excluded school refused to take him back. YP had also been in trouble with thepolice and was waiting for a court appearance. During the 12 months that this yp had been without an education placement there had been no work sent home and no alternative placement sought. Neither education nor the YOT had ensured that procedures had been followed that would have ensured that this yp had received appropriate education for 12 months – only resolved when our office became involved
– return to mainstream school failed
Child with behavioural difficulties was placed in an assessment unit following temp exclusion where he did well . Following assessment yp returned to mainstream school where the placement broke down rapidly and a request was made for the yp to return to assessment centre. School was ill-equipped to meet the needs of the child whereas the trained staff at the assessment centre were trained to manage behaviour
– no provision in county
Looked after child placed out of county had been excluded and was not receiving any tuition. Local authority advised they had no specialised provision for children with behavioural difficulties in county. Yp had been placed without consultation with receiving authority and was receiving minimum amount of home tuition – 10 hours per week.
- no placement identified
Yp been without an education placement for 12 months numerous exclusions for behaviour appropriate placement not been identified no diagnosis being the justification child received minimal education in isolation of any peers for 12months. This case highlighted the failure of education and health to liaise appropriately .We identified that YP had been referred for ASDassessment but that there is a 5 year waiting list.
– lack of intervention from LA(October 2012)
Child receiving exclusions for behaviour school struggle to manage and aware that additional intervention from external agencies required Local authority reluctant to provide any additional support until school could evidence that all avenues had been exhausted. School aware that they did not have the necessary resources to support. Contact with local authority confirmed to the office that additional support would not be forthcoming until school had exhausted the process. This case also highlighted that ed psych intervention is not always forthcoming as children are put on a awaiting list in order of priority due to resources.
This case also highlighted the difficulties in supporting parents and child – mum was intimidated by the head and meetings with the school were difficult parent in agreement that child has issues but was frustrated at a process driven mechanism for support rather than a needs led mechanism