Ed Yourself
Ed Yourself

EOTAS And Alternative Provision Future

Part-time alternative provision [AP] is used by schools and local authorities when it becomes necessary for whatever reason to find somewhere other than school for a child to receive some of their education. It comes under section 19 of the Education Act 1996.

EOTAS

In 2024 the government came up with a series of proposals to change the AP system. These were not firmed up in time to be included in the Children’s Wellbeing And Schools Bill so we stopped hearing about them and they currently remain voluntary.

Unregistered AP Voluntary Standards

However, the proposals have been revived as part of the government’s SEND reform programme via the EOTAS consultation which runs till September 18th 2026 and they now come up in the very first question of the consultation. (Scroll down for GOV.UK consultation links)

When the government consulted on alternative provision a couple of years ago, it conceded that there had not been sufficient thought about children with special educational needs and disability [SEND] who had a long term requirement for EOTAS. It said it would press pause and seek to understand more about the needs of these children.

However, the government now seems to have decided that earlier intervention in school will transform the future SEND system to such an extent that most pupils will never need an EHCP and hence the law on EHCPs can be dismantled, meaning that future generations will largely not be eligible for EOTAS via an EHCP although some current EOTAS EHCP secondary age and older may be spared [LINK]

EOTAS SEND Consultation First Impressions

At the same time, the government recognises that some form alternative provision will still be necessary so the 2024 AP proposals have been repurposed for the EOTAS consultation as a catch-all solution for children who will no longer meet the threshold for an EHCP.

NB it is proposed that future EHCPs will not be based on individual assessed need and corresponding required provision but instead will just set out the pre-determined specialist provision package, hence references to not being eligible for a Specialist Provision Package translate as not being eligible for an an EHCP in future.

This is covered in the very first question in the EOTAS consultation. Pages 16-17 of the consultation document [my highlights] say:

“For those children and young people who are not eligible for a Specialist Provision
Packages but are unable to continue their education in a formal setting, for example
because of health needs, it is important there is a clear pathway of support, so they
benefit from the most appropriate provision which best meets their needs. Chapter 3
explores how we can strengthen current arrangements where, under section 19 duties,
local authorities must ensure these children continue to receive suitable education
whilst longer term arrangements are secured, providing an important safety net for
them. We expect local authorities to work with the child’s school as well as alternative
provision providers and relevant services to arrange a time-limited package of
alternative provision focused on re-engagement with education (which may include off-
site provision), with the provision set out in the child or young person’s Individual
Support Plan (ISP). Arrangements should be regularly reviewed and underpinned by a
clear reintegration or transition plan, including to another school, with the aim of
supporting progression into the most appropriate educational setting where that
supports children and young people’s needs and outcomes. Beyond the duties
prescribed by section 19, we are interested in how we can best support the needs of
these children.”
Q.1. How can we best support the needs of children and young people who are
not eligible for a Specialist Provision Package but are unable to continue their
education in a formal setting?
Provide any information you consider helpful (optional, up to 250 words).

Alternative Provision Background

Part time alternative provision is a largely unregulated sector since alternative providers purposely keep their hours below full-time. If they were full time then they would have to register as a school and effectively turn themselves into a school rather than offering an alternative to school.

However, one major downside to not registering as a full-time school is that there is nothing else for part-time alternative providers operating during school hours to be officially registered as. It may also mean out of sight out of mind for some children sent to alternative providers, including where local authorities place children in AP because there is no available place at a special school.

It is therefore perhaps not surprising that the government arrived at the view in 2024-25 that part-time alternative provision should only be commissioned from an approved list of providers meeting national standards, and that placement should be time-limited, ending after a set number of weeks, with the focus on getting children back into a school setting.

Further, instead of an ad hoc system in which both local authorities and schools could place children in alternative provision, the government previously proposed to tidy this up so that local authorities would be given responsibility for quality assuring the provision, while schools would have responsibility for placing the child with a provider selected from the approved list.

My Comments

The government seems not to have considered that the proposals cannot be made to fit every scenario for example some children might be too anxious to attend any placement, not just school, also that it might make the anxiety worse knowing that any non-school alternative would only be very short-term.

In both the alternative provision proposals and the SEND reform plans, the government is intent on streamlining the delivery models first and then explaining how children will fit the models.

The proposals are still at a very early stage and will require a new Act of Parliament which the government has said will be the Education For All Bill (as yet unpublished)

Transforming SEND law is never quick or easy and the current proposals to limit EHCPs to “the most complex needs” with provision restricted to pre-set “specialist provision packages” are proving particularly controversial. 

Consultation Links

Related Edyourself Pages