Friday, March 13, 2009

Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment for EHE Consult 2007

Re Costs for home ed, in 2007 the Government said:

"These costs range from £125 per child per annum to £275 per child per annum, with an average cost of £200.

Given our estimate that local authorities currently work with 20,000 children who are being educated at home, this means that local authorities are currently spending around £4m per annum on monitoring home educators. This is in addition to the costs of advising and supporting home educators"

PARTIAL REGULATORY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR
ELECTIVE HOME EDUCATION CONSULTATION


Purpose and intended effect

Objective

1. To ensure that all children who are being educated at home receive a full-time, high quality education which is suitable to their needs.

Background

2. Whilst most parents choose to educate their children at school, a small proportion of parents prefer home education. Estimates of the number of children who are being educated at home vary significantly, but as many as 40,000 children might be being educated at home.

3. The regulatory framework for home education is currently minimal. If children have never been to school, there is no requirement to inform the local authority that home education is taking place. Parents are under an obligation to provide a ‘suitable’ full-time education, but there are no set standards or curriculum requirements. The consultation proposes guidelines on home education to local authorities.

Rationale for Government intervention

4. The Every Child Matters framework sets out the five outcomes which the Government wants all children to achieve. These are to stay safe, be healthy, enjoy and achieve, make a positive contribution and achieve economic well-being. Local authorities have an interest in ensuring that all children – whichever education setting they are in – achieve those outcomes.

5. Whilst many parents provide a high-quality education, there are concerns that a small minority of parents are unable or unwilling to do so. Local authorities report that a small – but increasing – number of parents may be withdrawing their children from school as a way to avoid School Attendance Orders. There are also concerns for the safety and well-being of a small number of children. The current system is often insufficiently responsive. Additionally, a lack of data makes it very difficult for local authorities and central government to plan services properly.

Consultation

Public consultation

6. The research which informed the consultation paper involved consultation with Education Otherwise and the Home Education Advisory Service, home educating parents and local authorities. The formal consultation period will run for 12 weeks and will include directly approaching stakeholders who have expressed an interest in the subject. This RIA is being published alongside the consultation, and we welcome contributions on the document.

Costs and benefits

Sectors and groups affected

7. The major sectors and groups affected by these proposals are:
• children who are being educated at home and their families; and
• local authorities.

Costs

8. Whilst issuing guidelines would not impose any new costs on any parts of the system, it would ensure that current costs continue. Given the great uncertainty around the numbers of children being educated at home, it is very difficult to provide an accurate estimate of these costs. However, we do know that local authorities already monitor the standard of home education which parents are providing. This is generally done on an annual or biannual basis. Local authorities have provided various estimates of the cost of the staff time and additional costs which the monitoring process and associated work entail. These costs range from £125 per child per annum to £275 per child per annum, with an average cost of £200.

9. Given our estimate that local authorities currently work with 20,000 children who are being educated at home, this means that local authorities are currently spending around £4m per annum on monitoring home educators. This is in addition to the costs of advising and supporting home educators, which would not be affected by changes to the current legal framework.

10. Research has shown that the current regulatory framework relies on good will. Where that good will is absent or has broken down, local authorities tell us that the system becomes extremely cumbersome, and does not provide the tools they need to monitor effectively. For example, one of the main current mechanisms is legal action to obtain a School Attendance Order which is expensive and time-consuming for all concerned, as well as encouraging an adversarial approach. The cost of this process varies enormously, but can be thousands of pounds when local authorities have to take legal advice.

Benefits

11. Issuing guidelines would not increase burdens of registration or monitoring on either local authorities or home educators. The guidelines do not increase intrusion into home educators’ or their children’s lives, but clarify the responsibilities of the local authority and advise on the best approach to balancing the rights of parents and the obligations local authorities.

12. Another clear benefit of this would be the avoidance of additional monitoring costs. However, it is likely that the current large costs and inconvenience of legal action would continue.

Enforcement, sanctions and monitoring

14. We will consider how to take forward the guidelines on elective home education in light of the consultation responses. No enforcement of the guidelines is planned.

RACE EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Part Two: Full Impact Assessment

Detailed aims of the policy and its context:

Whilst the vast majority of parents choose to send their children to school, a small number choose to educate their children at home. There is currently a minimal regulatory framework for home education: for example, there is no requirement for parents whose children have never been to school to register with the local authority. The law requires parents to provide a suitable full-time education for their children, but the courts have found that this ‘does not have to conform to any standards set by a school or local authority’.

Because there is no requirement for home educators to register their children with the local authority if the children have never been to school, there is no central record of the number of children who are being educated at home. However, LAs do maintain records of the children who are withdrawn from schools by their parents. These records show that between 0.1% and 0.4% of children are being educated at home. Whilst extrapolating from these figures is problematic, our latest estimate suggests there could be 40,000 children in home education, although some home education organisations suggest the figure is much higher.

The consultation proposes issuing guidelines which clarify the responsibilities of local authorities in relation to parents who education their children at home, and sets out the best approach to balancing the rights of parents and the obligations of local authorities.

Assessment of potential impact based on:

Evidence collected

The incomplete nature of the data has made it difficult to assess whether there are differences in the rate of home education between different ethnic groups. In order to obtain a more complete picture, the Department has commissioned two research studies, including one focussed on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller families. These studies found that children from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller families are substantially over-represented amongst families who choose home education. Children from other minority ethnic groups appear to be no more or less likely to be educated at home than children from White British families.

Consultation

The consultation will be launched on 8th May and will run for three months. We will send copies of the consultation to groups representing religious, Gypsy, Roma and Traveller, and Black and Minority Ethnic communities, home educators, groups representing home educators, and local authorities.

Consideration of evidence

The decision to consult on guidelines has been informed by research studies, as well as informal discussions with local authorities and home education organisations.

The Prevalence of Home Education in England: A Feasibility Study (York Consulting for the DfES, 2007) established the current difficulty in assessing the numbers of children who are being educated at home. It also concluded that “the current definition of ‘efficient and suitable’ education is considered too vague to enable LAs to assess the suitability of elective home education (EHE) and protect the welfare of children”.

The situation regarding the current policy, provision and practice in Elective Home Education for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children (DfES, 2006) states, “Few Gypsy/Roma and Traveller parents have the knowledge, skills and resources to provide or deliver a full-time education that is efficient and suitable. And yet the percentage of Gypsy/Roma and Traveller families who have opted for EHE is increasing at a high rate.” It concludes, “The legal context now requires a legislative amendment to the previous weak arrangements. The DfES needs to address the issues and take action to safeguard the interests and welfare of the very vulnerable children in these communities, and indeed, all those children being educated under the EHE arrangements.”

Local authorities tell us that it is difficult to establish whether or not a child is receiving a ‘suitable’ education at home, as there is no definition of what ‘suitable’ is in a modern context. The arrangements for monitoring rely mainly on good will, and there are insufficient safeguards to ensure the welfare of the child when parents are unwilling to cooperate.

Home educators are concerned that some local authorities go beyond their legal duties and are unhelpful or unnecessarily intrusive. Clearer legal standards would be helpful to ensure that the rights of the home educators are respected and observed.

Possible Alternative routes to achieving the policy aim(s)

An alternative would be to wait for the introduction of the Children Missing Education database, following the provisions in the Education and Inspections Act 2006. Whilst this would give local authorities a much clearer idea of which children are being educated at home, it would not give them with any better tools to ensure that the education which is being provided is adequate for children’s age and ability.

Other alternatives to achieving the policy aim include new legislation which would require all home educating parents to register with their local authority and giving local authorities the power to monitor home educators.

Record any changes you have made to the policy as a result of the assessment:

None.

What arrangements are in place/have been made for monitoring potential adverse impact?

After the final guidelines have been issued, we will examine whether it would be possible to commission a short research study to assess the impact of the changes.

How and when will the results of the monitoring be published?

The results of the study will be published routinely.

Publication and review of the Assessment results:

How and when will these results be published?

This REIA will be published alongside the consultation document.

When will it be reviewed?

Comments on the REIA are encouraged as part of the consultation process, and this assessment will be reviewed after the end of the consultation period.

Please see Guidance on section 35 Freedom of Information Act- exclusion from publications

DISABILITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Initial screening for impact

Detailed aims of the policy and its context:

Whilst the vast majority of parents choose to send their children to school, a small number choose to educate their children at home. There is currently a minimal regulatory framework for home education: for example, there is no requirement for parents whose children have never been to school to register with the local authority. The law requires parents to provide a suitable full-time education for their children, but the courts have found that this ‘does not have to conform to any standards set by a school or local authority’.

Because there is no requirement for home educators to register their children with the local authority if the children have never been to school, there is no central record of the number of children who are being educated at home. However, LAs do maintain records of the children who are withdrawn from schools by their parents. These records show that between 0.1% and 0.4% of children are being educated at home. Whilst extrapolating from these figures is problematic, our latest estimate suggests there could be 40,000 children in home education, although some home education organisations suggest the figure is much higher.

The consultation proposes issuing guidelines which clarify the responsibilities of local authorities in relation to parents who education their children at home, and sets out the best approach to balancing the rights of parents and the obligations of local authorities.

Assessment of potential impact based on:

Evidence collected

The decision to consult on issuing guidelines has been informed by the research studies, as well as informal discussions with local authorities and home education organisations.

The Prevalence of Home Education in England: A Feasibility Study (York Consulting for the DfES, 2006) established the current difficulty in assessing the numbers of children who are being educated at home. It also concluded that “the current definition of ‘efficient and suitable’ education is considered too vague to enable LAs to assess the suitability of EHE [elective home education] and protect the welfare of children”. The survey estimated that around 5% of children who are educated at home have a statement of special educational needs, compared to 3% of the general population. Introducing compulsory registration will allow local authorities to find out more about the characteristics of children who are being educated at home, and respond to any particular needs they have. This may include learning more about the proportion of children who have a disability.

The situation regarding the current policy, provision and practice in Elective Home Education for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children (DfES, 2006) states, “Few Gypsy/Roma and Traveller parents have the knowledge, skills and resources to provide or deliver a full-time education that is efficient and suitable. And yet the percentage of Gypsy/Roma and Traveller families who have opted for EHE is increasing at a high rate.” It concludes, “The legal context now requires a legislative amendment to the previous weak arrangements. The DfES needs to address the issues and take action to safeguard the interests and welfare of the very vulnerable children in these communities, and indeed, all those children being educated under the EHE arrangements.”

Consultation

The consultation will be launched on 8th May and will run for three months. We will send copies of the consultation to groups representing disabled children and parents.

Decision on whether to begin a full disability impact assessment

The Disability Rights Commission states that a full disability impact assessment should be performed if either:

• the policy is a major one in terms of scale or significance for the authority’s activities; or
• there is a clear indication that, although the policy is minor, it is likely to have a major impact upon disabled people – in terms either of numbers affected or the seriousness of the likely impact, or both.

Our preliminary analysis is that a full impact assessment is unnecessary. This is because the policy on home education is not major when set against the Department’s other policies and priorities.

However, this is a preliminary conclusion. We will consult groups with particular interest and expertise in disability during the consultation process, and will review the need for a fuller assessment in July.

Publication and review of the Assessment results:

How and when will these results be published?

This DIA will be published alongside the consultation.

When will it be reviewed?

Comments on the DIA are encouraged as part of the consultation process, and this assessment will be reviewed after the end of the consultation period.

=================================================================

13th March 2009

Education: Home Schooling
Questions asked by Lord Lucas

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldhansrd/text/90313w0001.htm

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Morgan of Drefelin on 25 February (WA 87), whether the guaranteed unit of funding applies to children who are being home-educated under Section 7 of the Education Act 1996; and, if not, what sum is on average paid to local authorities in respect of such children. [HL1830]

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Morgan of Drefelin on 25 February (WA 87), whether the guaranteed unit of funding applies to children who are being home-educated under Section 19(4) of the Education Act 1996; and, if not, what sum is on average paid to local authorities in respect of such children. [HL1831]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Children, Schools and Families (Baroness Morgan of Drefelin): The guaranteed unit of funding (GUF) would not be paid to young persons who are being home educated. Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 requires parents to secure education of children of compulsory school age either by regular attendance at school or otherwise. Home tuition would be a decision by a parent and no GUF would be paid in respect of such children. No other funding would be payable either by the department to the local authority.

The GUF would not be paid to local authorities for pupils under Section 19(4) of the 1996 Education Act as this section refers to young persons (not of compulsory school age), However Section 19(1) is a similar section for children of compulsory school age and GUF could be paid to a local authority where the authority has financial responsibility for such pupils. If the LA has financial responsibility and makes exceptional provision for the pupil to be home educated then the LA could claim the GUF. This is, however, likely to be a very

Exceptional circumstance as Section 19(2B) makes it clear that LAs can set up pupil referral units which are schools specially organised to provide education for children referred to in Section 19(1)."

No comments: