Special needs statistics

This being notice of another foray into government statistics, prompted by the piece about children and young adults with special educational needs at reference 1. Three things stand out. First, that the system needs more money thrown at it. Second, far too much of what money there is is being spent on very expensive private provision. Third, how do we account for the massive growth in the last decade. One supposes that the special needs themselves are more or less static, so it is not the growth there. 

However, my present concern is with the presentation of the statistics - for which the form seems to be that you go to reference 2 and cook up your own. 

The first statistical point about the first of the graphics above is that it does not give an 'other' line, which I compute to amount to around a third of the total. So there is quite a lot missing. The second is that it only covers those with an education, health and care plan (EHC), perhaps a quarter of those with special needs. In part, those with the greater need, in part those with parents with the time and energy needed to fight with local authorities about provision. With special needs generally accounting for well over 10% of the 9m pupils in England.

The snap above gives a breakdown of all those with special needs - in which autism does not figure as largely as it does in that above. What we do not get is any idea of how many of these pupils are illiterate, which while perhaps not a diagnosis, is a major handicap in today's workplace, likely to lead to poor employment outcomes, delinquency and crime.

I assume that 'missing' is the combination of those without special needs with those for whom there is no code for specific need. Which may account for my failure to reconcile the totals here with those given by the Financial Times.

And this is about as far as I got. But I still remain to be convinced about this DIY approach to statistics. Yes it is all there, but it is really only all there for the professional. For the professional who knows his way around the system and knows what questions to ask. I rather miss the fat and stodgy statistical publications which did rather more of the work for you, even if the tabulation you really, really wanted was always missing.

I see an analogy between the digested news you get from the likes of the Financial Times and the raw news, the rubbish you get from less reputable outlets and on social media.

But perhaps this comes down to money too. Producing decent statistical digests is an expensive business which is unlikely to be able to recoup its costs from the paying public. So offering DIY instead attracts a government which is trying hard to cut costs.

References

Reference 1: Special needs support in England is financially ‘unsustainable’, report finds: Urgent reform is needed after demand for extra educational support doubles in a decade, warns watchdog - Peter Foster, Anna Gross, Financial Time - 2024.

Reference 2: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/data-tables/special-educational-needs-in-england.