In plain English: Should there be a time limit on how long a child can be educated through an accredited online provider, or should this stay flexible and case by case? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• If your child has used online provision, how long was it needed and why?

• How well does the proposal reflect the need for flexibility based on individual circumstances?

• What approach to duration would better reflect real experiences?

In plain English: If there are new quality standards, who should be checking providers meet them — the local authority, or someone else? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• Who has monitored the quality of your child’s provision, and how effective has this been?

• How do you feel about local authorities taking on this role under the proposals?

• What would give you confidence that provision is being properly checked?

In plain English: Should all EOTAS providers (tutors, therapists, non-school settings, etc.) have to meet a new national safeguarding and quality standard? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• What has been your experience of the quality of alternative or EOTAS provision?

• How would national standards work in light of your existing package? Do you have providers in your EOTAS package that aren't specialist/specifically alternatively provision, such as PE or art classes?

• What would you want national standards to include based on your experience?

In plain English: What protections should be built in so that reintegration isn't rushed or pushed through when it isn't right for the child or young person? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• Have you experienced pressure to return your child to school before they were ready?

• How well do the proposals protect against this happening?

• What would help ensure reintegration decisions are made appropriately for each child?

In plain English: If a plan is made to move a child from EOTAS back into a school or college, what needs to be in place for that plan to actually work?

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• If reintegration has been discussed or attempted, what worked well and what didn’t?

• How realistic do the proposals feel based on your child’s readiness and needs?

• What would need to be in place for reintegration to succeed for your child? 

In plain English: How should decisions about who qualifies for EOTAS be kept fair and consistent, especially in areas where there simply isn't enough suitable school provision available? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• Have decisions about your child’s provision felt consistent and needs-led? Why or why not?

• How likely is the proposed system to improve consistency based on your experience?

• What additional safeguards would help ensure fair decisions for families?

In plain English: If a school is going to be given this new responsibility, what training, funding, or checks should it be required to have first?

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• From your experience, what knowledge or support did education professional have or lack when making decisions about your child?

• How well do the proposals address gaps in capacity or expertise?

• What specific support or safeguards would have improved your experience?

This padlet is provided by Worcestershire Parent Carer Forum to gather feedback from Worcestershire parent carers to help us represent your views at regional and national discussions. The information will also be used to help us submit a response to the EOTAS Reform consultation.

The padlet also shares where you can find more information and provides the details of how you can submit your own response.

Please only add posts and reactions to this padlet if you are a parent carer (someone caring for a child with additional needs aged 0-25) who lives in Worcestershire.

If you do not live in Worcestershire please contact your local parent carer forum to provide feedback.

The consultation outlines a series of measures intended to reform the SEND system - some of these measures have already been finalised, and this is clearly indicated within the document.

Swipe / scroll down ↓ to read the responses in each section and swipe / scroll right → to read more information.

The Questions

We have taken the questions from the consultation document.

You might find it helpful to read the consultation document to further understand the question (this is included on this padlet in the Useful Information section (swipe / scroll right → ) - where you see this symbol 🛈 we have provided a pinned post that explains more detail.

Some of the consultation questions are too long to write in full so we have summarised them.

When we write 'they' on this padlet it says 'we' in the consultation meaning the Department for Education / the government.

Add a post (your thought / comment / link):
Tap / click the “+” icon under the question to add a post with your feedback.

⭐You don't need to answer every question⭐

Scroll / swipe across and find the ones that are most important to you. We have also added some polls for the questions that are a yes / no answer to help you give a quick response.

Rate posts:
Tap the post to give a thumbs up 👍 or thumbs down 👎 to agree or disagree.

🔐 No account needed — just post as a guest. We have hidden the contributors names to posts and comments so everything you post will be anonymous however if you are signed in we might be able to see this information when we download the data from the padlet - please sign out to stay anonymous.

Swipe swipe / scroll right → to the end to find it 🙂

In plain English: What should happen for children who don't meet the new, narrower eligibility bar for EOTAS, but still genuinely can't be in a school or college setting?

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• Based on your experience, what has happened when your child could not attend school but did not fit existing criteria?

• How well do you think the proposed eligibility approach would have worked for your child’s situation?

• What changes would make this proposal better reflect the realities families face?

In plain English: This is the central question about who should be in control of your child's EOTAS arrangements — the council, the school, or a shared model between them.

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• In your experience, who has been most responsible for decisions about your child’s education, and how well has this worked?

• How would your preferred option improve (or change) that experience in practice?

• What would need to happen to ensure your chosen model works effectively for families like yours?

In plain English: Given the proposal to remove the specific SEND Tribunal appeal route for EOTAS decisions, what should replace it so families still have a genuine way to challenge a decision? This is one of the most significant questions in the whole consultation. 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• What has been your experience of resolving disagreements with schools or local authorities?

• How confident would you feel in the proposed alternative to the current system?

• What would make a dispute process feel fair, independent, and effective for your family?

In plain English: Should older teenagers and young adults on EOTAS be quality-assured in the same way as younger children, or does this age group need a different approach? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• If relevant, how has support changed as your child has moved into post-16 education?

• How well do the proposals reflect the different needs, independence, and outcomes for this age group?

• What would need to be adapted to make quality assurance meaningful and appropriate for young people?

In plain English: Should children already on EOTAS be reassessed at all — and if so, should that apply to every age group, or only to younger children moving from primary to secondary? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• How important has stability in your child’s current provision been, and why?

• How do you think reassessment would affect your child based on your experience?

• What would make any reassessment process feel proportionate, safe, and fair?

In plain English: If your primary-age child is reassessed and still qualifies for support, do you agree they should move into the new Specialist Provision Package system, with a named school taking over management of their EOTAS arrangements? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• What has your experience been of working with a named school (if applicable)?

• How do you think this proposal would change how your child’s provision is managed?

• What would need to be in place for this approach to work effectively in practice?

• How do you think the Specialist Provision Package system would work for EOTAS?

• Do you have/have you used provisions that are not on the LA's list in order to meet the needs of your child? If so, why?

In plain English: If a reassessed child is found not to qualify for an EHCP any more, what should happen to them — should they be moved towards a school placement, kept on EOTAS with reviews, or handled case by case? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• Have you experienced reductions or changes in support, and what impact did this have?

• How well does the proposal address what happens next for children in this situation?

• What would help ensure children continue to receive suitable education and support?

In plain English: What actually makes a transition (whether reassessment, or a move back into school) go well, rather than badly, for a child on EOTAS? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• What has your experience been of transitions between settings or stages?

• How well do the proposals reflect what actually helps transitions go smoothly?

• What additional planning or support would improve stability for children like yours?

In plain English: In your experience, do schools currently step in early enough when a child's health is affecting their attendance, before things escalate to the local authority? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• How did your child’s school respond when attendance first became difficult?

• How well do the proposals reflect your experience of early intervention?

• What changes would have made support more timely or effective?

In plain English: Who should be responsible for what, and how could schools, councils and health services work together better and faster for these children? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• How have different services worked together in your experience?

• How clearly do the proposals reflect who is responsible for what?

• What would improve coordination, communication, or accountability?

In plain English: What would help a child return to school successfully after a period of health-related alternative provision? 

PROMPTS

^{These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.}

• If your child has returned (or attempted to return) to school, what helped or hindered this?

• How realistic do the proposals feel based on your experience?

• What support would be needed to make transitions sustainable?

In plain English: Should a child or young person being educated fully online still be formally 'on the books' at a physical school, even if they never attend in person? 

PROMPTS

These are to help you think of answers. Please do not feel limited to these, or to answer these at all.

• Has your child remained on a school roll during alternative provision, and what impact did this have?

• How well does the proposal reflect your experience of being on or off roll?

• What approach would best support accountability and access to support?

This covers non-EOTAS access to alternative provisions, including under Section 19 of the Education Act 1996.

EOTAS here refers to those with EOTAS through their EHCP under s.61 of the Children and Families Act.

This consultation covers:

• Education Other Than In School or College (EOTAS, under s.61 of the Children and Families Act 2013)

• support for children who cannot attend school because of health needs (such as under s.19 of the Education Act 1996)

• how schools and local authorities use accredited online education providers for alternative provision

The questions are split into 4 chapters:

1. Chapter 1: Reforming education otherwise than at school

   This chapter covers how EOTAS should work for children entering the new SEND system from 2029/30 - eligibility, who's in charge, appeals, and quality assurance. EOTAS here refers to those with EOTAS through their EHCP under s.61 of the Children and Families Act.

2. Chapter 2: Children and young people on existing EOTAS arrangements 

   This chapter is about what happens to children already on EOTAS when any new system starts (expected 2029/30) — particularly the proposed reassessment for primary-age children. EOTAS here refers to those with EOTAS through their EHCP under s.61 of the Children and Families Act.

3. Chapter 3: Children who can't attend school due to health needs 

   This chapter covers children who need alternative provision because of physical or mental health needs — a related but legally distinct group from EOTAS. 

   This covers non-EOTAS access to alternative provisions, including under Section 19 of the Education Act 1996.

4. Chapter 4: Children in accredited online education 

   This chapter covers the small number of children receiving alternative provision through accredited online-only education providers. 

   
   

Worcestershire Parent Carer Forum is a collective of parent carers of children with a wide range of special educational needs and disabilities. Our aim is to make sure that parents’ voices are heard when it comes to planning and decision making about services for our SEND children and young people in Worcestershire.

We are part of the National Network of Parent Carer Forums. Parent Carer Forums are representative local groups of parents and carers of children and young people with disabilities who work alongside local authorities, education, health and other service providers to ensure the services they plan, commission, deliver and monitor meet the needs of children and families.

Our Forum uses parental voice to influence change through events, discussion groups and working groups. We gather the views of local families and work with the council, educational settings, health providers and other agencies to highlight where local services are working well, or challenge when changes or improvements need to be made.

Find out more about our work:

www.facebook.com/WorcestershirePCF

Become a member and get involved!:

https://worcspcf.org/get-involved/