Guidance is statutory that is it is prescribed or authorized by statute. The CME (Children Missing Education) guidance is statutory because there is a clause in the original act which directs the relevant authority to take note of the contents of any guidance issued. It would appear that this is a neat way of altering the law without having to keep changing the primary legislation.
Guidelines are not statutory, and are basically just advice as to how to carry out particular duties.
GuidANCE trumps guideLINES.
As I understand it, HE cannot have statutory guidance because there is nothing in statute which refers an authority to any guidance. So to have statutory HE guidance we would need a change to the primary legislation.
It seems to me that this would not be a good thing, as each new guidance issued alters the legal situation - if I have misunderstood this PLEASE tell me, and explain to me how.
We have a situation where the 2007 HE Guidelines specifically state "The guidance issued makes it clear that the duty does not apply to children who are being educated at home." This was in relation to CME and pointed to the 2007 guidance on CME.
3.3.16. If it becomes known that a child identified as not receiving education is being home educated, this should be recorded on the local authority's database and no further action should be taken unless there is cause for concern about the child's safety and welfare. Monitoring arrangements already exist for children being educated at home. Where there are concerns about the child's safety and welfare, Local Safeguarding Children Board procedures must be followed.
However, the guidance was updated and so now it is the 2009 guidance which is the one that must be adhered to, and this is where the problems arise.
2009 CME guidance gives over a whole section to Home Education I would like to draw attention to this particular section:
92. In order to discharge their duties in relation to children not receiving an education, local authorities should make inquiries with parents about whether their home educated children are receiving a suitable education. The Elective Home Education Guidelines for Local Authorities make clear that parents who home educate may take a number of equally valid approaches to educational provision for their children.
So in one fell swoop we have gone from a case of - "record the fact that the child is home educated and that's all you need to do", to "make inquiries".
It would seem from looking at the websites of various local authorities that they have interpreted this new duty by immediately referring HEers to the CME department. North Yorkshire for instance was certainly a week or two ago advising headteachers not to deregister a child 'on demand' but to instead pass the details onto the CME team.
"2.1 Regarding the Headteacher's duty to inform the LA before deleting pupil who is to be home educated from the register. In such cases please inform: Julie Fenny, CME coordinator"
Unless I have misunderstood the law regarding deregistration, the headteacher is supposed to remove the child from the register immediately the deregistration letter has been received, and then notify the LA, not vice versa.
If we look at what is happening in Bedfordshire, it's an even worse scenario:
"When parents withdraw their child from school to EHE, the child’s name can only
be deleted from the admissions register when the parents inform the school in
writing (section 8 (d) of the Education (Pupil Registration) Regulations 2006)
giving reasons for decisions. The Head Teacher/Governor has to inform the LA of
withdrawal together with reasons before the child’s name is deleted."
Compare that with the actual law:
"It is then the duty of the proprietor of the school to inform the LA within 10 working days under Regulation 13 (3): “when the name of a pupil has been deleted from the admission register in accordance with regulation 9(1)(c) the proprietor shall make a return to the local education authority giving the full name and address of that pupil within the ten school days immediately following the date on which the pupil's name was so deleted”.
Arse about face isn't it? (You can see the full details here)
More and more cases are turning up where HEers are being *found out* having come into contact with local authority services. It would seem to be the case that everyone with a connection to children's services has a duty to inform the CME department about any HE children they come across in the course of their work. Previously, as far as I understand it, the librarian, school nurse, health visitor, hospital, gp etc etc could choose to *shop* you if they felt that way inclined, but equally could choose to do nothing and let you go on your merry way with no further hassle. It would seem that the CME guidance has changed all that, so unless you are able to avoid all public services you stand a very good chance of becoming known. If all LAs follow N Yorks lead and report straight to CME officers before deregistering a child, and it seems unlikely that N Yorks are acting as a maverick authority, then we effectively have non voluntary registration.
Whilst the 2007 EHE Guidelines are not statutory, they do stand as a clear reminder that HE was not to be conflated with CME. If we put in place new, updated guidelines, will that particular element be removed? If it is, are we left with not a leg to stand on when it comes to challenging the CME guidance, which is what I believe we need to do before we even think about putting new guidelines in place.
Thanks to Gill for laying this out on this blog piece, and to Elaine for digging out the dodgy LA practices.
ETA: thinking about it further, would it even be possible to refer to outdated guidance in new guidelines? I would imagine not, so it would seem that that particular section will have to go.
Another addition: I have had a message passed to me via a third party from Alison Sauer:
"You might, if you are brave enough, like to suggest to Tech that she revisits her blog post and quotes the correct law........which sadly means that all these policies are actually technically correct. I'd really hate her to look daft. And this is not a sarcastic comment, it's genuine otherwise I would be on there correcting her.
Tech is quoting 1995 regs not 2006 ones. And the guidance accompanying it is poisonous and confusing. It tells schools to notify LAs ASAP and if the dereg is with immediate effect to delay dereg for 2 days.
I went ballistic when they changed it but it had no effect........
Alison Sauer"
Which is interesting as the section I quoted came Derbyshire Council's website screenshot linked to above and here too.
Elaine has posted this rather clear graphic dated 01/09/08, along with some other interesting information on the forums
Posts
.jpg)
thanks for making it so crystal clear.
ReplyDeletex
Do you like this from the Children Missing Education report from Ofsted
ReplyDeleteThe actions taken to prevent children from missing education or becoming ‘lost to the system’
.
"5. Families constantly move into and out of areas. Current national systems for sharing information as children move between schools are limited in their efficiency. There is no obligation for families who choose to educate their children at home to register this intention with the local authority. Moreover, no national system for tracking children from birth onwards is fully in operation. As a result, local authorities are hampered in fulfilling their duties to safeguard children and young people."
.
I ain't quite work out how they can lose children who are in the system as they seem to be calling for all children to be ine the system but............
Ah. This maybe explains why the CME social worker hounded me when I moved to a new area, despite me telling him we'd already been home educating for ages. He probably thought that was what he was supposed to do *rolls eyes*
ReplyDeleteThanks for explaining all this so clearly.
I had wondered about this last year (non voluntary registration via public services notifying).
ReplyDeleteFrom "their" POV it makes sense to use all possible processes to make a record and do this, and I'm not surprised this is occurring. ****ed off, but not surprised.
It also lays down the ground work to bring in a registration scheme, as then that can help "save" us from the hassle etc. I wonder how long it will be before that one gets used to sugar coat proposed guidelines to us?
After registration we'll then be on to defining what constitutes an effective education and on to where we were headed last year with the Badman stuff.
I had wondered about this last year (non voluntary registration via public services notifying).
ReplyDeleteFrom "their" POV it makes sense to use all possible processes to make a record and do this, and I'm not surprised this is occurring. ****ed off, but not surprised.
It also lays down the ground work to bring in a registration scheme, as then that can help "save" us from the hassle etc. I wonder how long it will be before that one gets used to sugar coat proposed guidelines to us?
After registration we'll then be on to defining what constitutes an effective education and on to where we were headed last year with the Badman stuff.
The overlapping acts/regulations do not help. Is it still the case that the proprietor can be personally fined for failing to deregister:
ReplyDelete"A person who contravenes or fails to comply with any requirement imposed on him by regulations under this section is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale." Ed Act 1996.
or has that been superseded?
god only knows, it seems bits change here there and everywhere :(
ReplyDeleteOh and just for the record... I am MORE than happy to be wrong, I have asked for people to point out to me if I am :)
ReplyDeleteBeen for a look.I can't find the 2006 guidance online but in the 2006 guidelines says no such thing in relation to dereg Alison's mentions above.
ReplyDeleteIt says:-
3.9 De-registration of a child from a school is covered by section 9(1)(c) of the Education (Pupil Registration) Regulations 1995. Parents who wish to home-educate a child who is registered at a maintained school or an independent school must inform the school formally, in writing, of their intention to de-register. The school must delete the child's name from their register upon receipt of written notification from the parents and make a return (giving the child's name and address) to the local authority within 10 school days of removal. Local authorities may encourage parents to inform them direct, but have no legal right to insist that they do so.
So not sure what Alison means.
She could be thinking of a version she drew up, probably never expected it not to be used and just assumed it had?.
ReplyDeleteagain fwd'd by a third party. The comments section is available to all...
ReplyDeleteAnd they are wrong and quoting the 1995 pupil registration regulations. So if she wants to have a go at someone how about Derbyshire who are quoting a law that is 4 years (last month) out of date?? 4 years out of date is unforgivable! Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it true and looking at what local authorities claim the law is is asking for trouble in my experience.
OK here's the low down which you should feel free to pass on and Tech can quote with or without attributing it to me if she so wishes:
"It is then the duty of the proprietor of the school to inform the LA within 10 working days under Regulation 13 (3): “when the name of a pupil has been deleted from the admission register in accordance with regulation 9(1)(c) the proprietor shall make a return to the local education authority giving the full name and address of that pupil within the ten school days immediately following the date on which the pupil's name was so deleted”. (Pupil reg regs 1995) was quoted by Tech as a quote from Derbyshire.
This was actually superseded 4 years ago by this:
Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006
8.(1) ……. a pupil of compulsory school age shall be deleted from the admission register—
(d) …[when]..... he has ceased to attend the school and the proprietor has received written notification from the parent that the pupil is receiving education otherwise than at school
12. (3) As to the contents of the admission register comprising particulars relating to a pupil whose name is to be deleted in accordance with regulation 8(1)(d), .......), the proprietor shall make a return to the local authority for every such pupil giving the full name of the pupil, the address of any parent with whom the pupil normally resides and the ground upon which their name is to be deleted from the admission register as soon as the ground for deletion is met in relation to that pupil, and in any event no later than deleting the pupil's name from the register.
The guidance http://www.bristol-cyps.org.uk/services/pdf/keeping-registers-guidance.pdf (can't be bothered right now to find the DfE source but this is the actual doc) which accompanies the regulations says that schools should inform their local authority as soon as they become aware of the deletion along with a minimum delay of a two working days before the deletion is made. Once the authority has had reasonable time to receive the notice (or two days max if the dereg is with immediate effect), the school will make the deletion.
Here's the actual section from the guidance
156. On receipt of such written notification, schools must inform the pupil’s local authority before deleting the pupil in order to allow the authority to put the appropriate systems in place. Schools should pass the information to their local authority when they receive verbal notification rather than wait for the written confirmation. Further information on this process is in the section on Providing Information.
Informing Local Authorities of deletions
175. The regulations require schools to notify local authorities of deletions in the following circumstances:
• the pupil has been permanently excluded;
• the pupil is moving away from the area and is not known to have registered at another school;
• the school medical officer has certified that the pupil has a medical
ReplyDeleteSeptember 2006 Version 1 30 Guidance on The Education (Pupil Registration)(England) Regulations 2006
condition and is unlikely to return;
• the pupil is leaving a non-maintained school and is not known to have registered at another school; and
• the school has received written notification that the pupil will be educated outside the school system.
The local authority should pass the information on immediately if the pupil lives in another local authority’s area.
176. The requirement to inform local authorities of deletions in these 5 circumstances before making the deletion is in addition to all other statutory requirements to share information, such as the Education (Pupil Information) Regulations (as amended) and statutory guidance on exclusions and children with medical needs. Schools do not wait for the local authority to acknowledge the notice.
177. Schools should inform their local authority of these deletions immediately they become aware that they may be made; they should not, for example wait for the completion of an appeal against permanent exclusion or for written confirmation that the parents intend to home educate. It should be recognised that the authority may have other involvement with pupils and therefore be aware of the possible deletion such as providing the school medical officer service for maintained schools and handling appeals against exclusion from maintained schools. However, schools should consider whether the information has reached all of the relevant services in their authority.
I always say it should be noted that this is not preventing the deletion and the pupil cannot be prevented from ceasing to attend the school from the date given by the parent even if this does not give any notice
It should have bloody well been spotted by those who were supposed to be looking out for such things and a great stink raised.........but just like 436A it was missed. It's a pile of poo (technical term freely applicable to lots of legislation from the last 15 yrs or so...) and way, way too complicated.
So technically N Yorks are within their rights as are Beds. I might have phrased it differently if I had been them however which would have given it a different emphasis.
A
TBH I think that the focus on the dereg, irritatingly confusing as it appears to be, is a distraction from the central issue which, AFAICS is CME and that little section in the HE Guidelines which we really must not lose whilst CME affects us.
ReplyDeleteThat should clear up any confusion.
ReplyDeleteDfE Updated: 22 September 2010
ReplyDeletehttp://www.education.gov.uk/schools/pupilsupport/behaviour/attendance/schoolattendancedata/a0010009/removing-pupils-from-the-admissions-and-attendance-registers
.
The Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006 govern when a pupil can be removed from the admissions/attendance register.
The regulations enable schools to delete compulsory school-age children in the following circumstances:
.
the pupil is withdrawn to be educated outside the school system
.
With the exception of pupils who are subject to a school attendance order and pupils with special educational needs (SEN) for whom the LA has made arrangements, there is no requirement for LA approval of deletions from registers.
.
.
I hope that will shut up the scaremongers who are causing so much distress to families .
Were we too busy fighting Badman, did they sneak this in the back door, have they taken us for fools? Doesn't make it right, don't care what Donaldson says or what the guidelines say my home my child, they are not fit!
ReplyDelete