This snapshot, taken on
10/08/2011
, shows web content acquired for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search may not work in archived websites and contact details are likely to be out of date.
 
 
The UK Government Web Archive does not use cookies but some may be left in your browser from archived websites.

Halcon Community Primary School

Read key facts about Halcon Community Primary School, its delegation of special educational needs (SEN) funding, the system it used and how it evaluated value for money (VfM).

Key facts

  • Number on roll – 140.
  • Percentage on free school meals (FSM) – 50 per cent.
  • Percentage of children identified as having SEN – 49.
  • Number of statements of SEN – 0.
  • Percentage of children who made two or more levels of progress between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 (2007/08) – 95 per cent in English, 100 per cent in mathematics.
  • Number of permanent exclusions in the last three years – 0.

Delegation of SEN funding

The school governors and headteacher based the allocation of its SEN budget on the following factors

  • The provision or funding required to meet the needs of statements of SEN.
  • The provision or funding needed to meet the needs of all children in the school, using a provision map.

There was a clear link between identified needs, use of provision mapping and spending on individual children.

Their system

The headteacher allocated the SEN budget transparently, with the involvement of the senior leadership team and the special educational needs coordinator (SENCO), using provision mapping. Intervention programmes and targets were discussed with parents, who were encouraged to be involved in the provision their child received and in monitoring outcomes.

The school recognised that there is more to learner progress than academic achievement and that both are affected by the wider influences on a child's life. Therefore, the school employed a whole-learner approach to education, with a parent and family support adviser (PFSA) working proactively with parents, school staff and other agencies to support children and their families.

The PFSA worked with parents as appropriate. Those who were ‘hard to reach’ were targeted to make sure that they had opportunities for regular involvement and feedback on the progress of their children. Additional parental involvement was actively sought at reviews and parents’ evenings.

Evaluating VfM

There was a sophisticated and detailed tracking grid system in school to monitor the progress of every child in every subject and across the five outcomes. The class teacher and SENCO regularly benchmarked progress and monitored outcomes to make sure the interventions were effective. Provision mapping was used to monitor SEN interventions against pupil outcomes and to plan future interventions.