Education, health and care plans: What do we know so far?

Cochrane, Hannah; Soni, Anita

doi:10.1111/1467-9604.12316

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The need to ensure adequate provision for children and young people with additional needs is more crucial than ever, given limited access to education and face‐to‐face support due to the COVID‐19 pandemic (Ofsted, 2020). Previous research has attempted to synthesise literature on EHCPs but has failed to focus on service user experience in a systematic fashion (see Cochrane & Soni, 2020). The current review provides a detailed systematic review of the literature looking at service users’ experience of the EHCP process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying service users' experience of the education, health and care plan process: A systematic literature review

Thompson

Hall

2022

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) were introduced in 2014 to improve provision for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Some service users have found this change positive, but there is also dissatisfaction among service users with the EHCP process. This was captured in the recent Education Select Committee report, which took evidence from a range of stakeholders, representatives and service users examining the context, support and barriers associated with SEND (House of Commons, 2019). This review identifies and appraises research concerning service users' experience of the EHCP process, to establish key barriers to improving SEND provision. Papers evaluating the experience of children, young people, parents and professionals with EHCPs were included to assess levels of user satisfaction. A total of 25 studies were reviewed in‐depth. Five key themes were revealed: lack of integration with health and social care; insufficient knowledge and understanding; involvement of children, young people and parents; increased expectations and demands for professionals; and need for greater parity and clarity. Most service users were dissatisfied with the process and expressed a need for greater funding and time spent disseminating knowledge of the EHCP process. This paper summarises key limitations of, and potential improvements to, the current EHCP process. Structural reform is required to ensure accountability of service failures. Further research is required focusing on the experience of additional professional groups, such as educational psychologists and social workers, whose experiences are under‐represented.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying service users' experience of the education, health and care plan process: A systematic literature review

Thompson

Hall

2022

Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, SENCos may work in settings where a few or many children with SEND attend and they may have been in post for anything between a few months or many years (Gedge, 2018), meaning levels of experience also vary. Added to this, the expectations of parents and other setting staff can be considerable, though there may be a gap between these and SENCos' own perceptions of their knowledge and skills (Cochrane & Soni, 2020). Furthermore, despite the need for training and culture change being recognised (House of Commons Education Committee, 2018; Lamb & Blandford, 2017), England's financial and market-driven context reduced the resources available to address these (Hellawell, 2017;House of Commons Education Committee, 2019a), with the resourcing available to Local Authorities known to be too limited to successfully operationalise many aspects of the policy (House of Commons Education Committee, 2018Committee, , 2020National Audit Office, 2019).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study examined the implementation of EHC plans, described as a microcosm of the wider arena of policy and practice (Hellawell, 2017), as a means of identifying challenges and influences to the working practices of SENCos, since they are the principle advocates and implementers of SEND provision. Although several studies have investigated aspects of EHC plan implementation (for example, Boesley & Crane, 2018;Cochrane & Soni, 2020;Sales & Vincent, 2018) few have investigated SENCo perspectives of the salient external and internal influences on EHC plan implementation. The findings of this research identified enablers and challenges to EHC plan implementation, and it is suggested that enactment of the recommendations informed by these findings will address some of the challenges of implementing EHC plans and support SENCos to develop their practice.…”

Section: Introduction and Rationalementioning

confidence: 99%

“It was tough making sure it happened”: SENCo experience of the reality and risk of education and health care plan implementation

Richards

2022

Educational Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In England, the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Code of Practice (2015) was heralded as a significant reformation of provision for children and young people with additional and complex learning needs. Effective implementation of the Code requires the key implementers, Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCos), to develop and negotiate provision in their settings, to interface with colleagues, families and expert professionals, and to apply for and implement Education and Health Care (EHC) plans for the children and young people with the most complex needs. However, whilst this added to SENCo workload and responsibilities, systemic, resource and dominant discourse challenges remained the same. EHC plans have been described as a microcosm of the wider arena of policy and practice. Studies exploring SENCo perceptions of the enablers and challenges, which has import for commissioners and practitioners, are limited. This article presents part of a mixedmethods study which examined SENCo perceptions of the salient external and internal influences on EHC plan implementation. Integration of the analysed data sets uncovered themes related to purpose, support, communities of learning, and relationships. Key recommendations, whose enactment would support and develop SENCos, so they in turn can best promote the learning, development, wellbeing and inclusion of children and young people with SEND, and their families, are made. This article closes by proposing that the need for a professional information hub and support mechanisms for SENCos has never been greater

show abstract

“…Sales and Vincent (2018) identify a similar link between ‘person‐centred’ approaches and ‘greater parental involvement’, but whilst the ‘involvement’ of families may improve provision, this arguably falls short of coproduction. This is exemplified by Cochrane and Soni (2020), who are clear that parents are becoming more ‘involved’, but coproduction is not realised because learners are not sufficiently included.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Coproduction illusion: considering the relative success rates and efficiency rates of securing an Education, Health and Care plan when requested by families or education professionals

Boddison

Soan

2021

Research in Spec Educ Needs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This comparative study examines success and efficiency rates for Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessments in England when requested by families or education professionals. England is the only nation in the UK with EHC needs assessments. These are requested from the Local Authority (LA) if the school’s ordinarily‐available provision is insufficient for individuals to make expected progress. Policy states that needs assessments should include parents, pupils and professionals in all decision making (coproduction). After a needs assessment, the LA may issue an EHC plan. This study considers whether the outcome of a needs assessment (issuing an EHC plan) is independent of the source of the request. Statistical analysis compared outcomes of needs assessments requested by families and education professionals. Analysis of publicly‐available datasets and policy provided further context. Findings included: (i) a need for further research to explore inconsistencies in outcomes of needs assessments across England; (ii) LAs efficient at issuing EHC plans were consistently efficient for requests from education professionals and families; (iii) a potential discrepancy between families’ perceived level of involvement and the reality: a ‘coproduction illusion’. It is proposed that policy and guidance in England requires revision to ensure consistent use of language, roles, and responsibilities.

show abstract

Education, health and care plans: What do we know so far?

Cited by 11 publications

References 16 publications

Identifying service users' experience of the education, health and care plan process: A systematic literature review

Identifying service users' experience of the education, health and care plan process: A systematic literature review

“It was tough making sure it happened”: SENCo experience of the reality and risk of education and health care plan implementation

The Coproduction illusion: considering the relative success rates and efficiency rates of securing an Education, Health and Care plan when requested by families or education professionals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About